Traditionally, it was the Democrats who fought for civil liberties. But Bill Clinton ran as a liberal and governed as a centrist. His campaign promises were about things like ending discrimination against gays in the military, but his governance produced the highest number of gays discharged from the military in history. It should have been a clue when he appointed Janet Waco to be his attorney general. Meanwhile, it was the Republicans like Nixon who brought us things like the War On Americans I Mean Drugs and the slaughter of students at Kent State by military Generals. Nowadays, it’s a bit hard to tell the difference.
I am a daily train commuter (both subway and railroad) between NYC and Connecticut. If somebody came up to me and decided to do a “random search” on my briefcase, I would ask to see a warrent, since AFAIK the 4th amendment still stood.
The difference between this policy and the one that airports have is that when purchasing airline tickets, there is a disclaimer to be read that by using their services, you agree to pass through a security check. There is no such condition when I purchase my train tickets.
There was just as great of a chance of someone setting off a briefcase bomb on a train or subway as there was before the one in Madrid went off. How is it that a train bombing on another continent is going to raise the chances of it happening here? If anything, it would probably DECREASE the chances, since would-be terrorists know that we’ll be expecting it now, and would be better off trying something new.
And Weirddave makes a valid point - when someone hijacks a plane, they can reroute it anywhere in the world. If I were to hijack the A train, my choices are Inwood, Grand Concourse or Queens…and only until the MTA turns off the third rail power
Wow. Pretty judgemental. So, since I live in Boston, where this thing hasn’t even gone into effect yet, I’m a sheep-like fucker? Would you consider taking that back, or will you insist on being an asshole?
Since you seem to be the judge of all that is sheep-like, tell me this – if I’m approached by a cop asking to search my bag, how should I respond? Just exactly how much jail time should I serve in order to preserve enough freedom to satisfy you, some anonymous asshole from the internet?
That doesn’t make any sense.
After all, The Tokyo subway sarin attacks were on another continent than the Madrid attacks. This doesn’t seem to have had any effect at all.
Trains, like it or not, are a terrorist target. And we have numerous examples of their being so, especially if we take IRA bombings into account.
And yes, we are expecting it, which accounts for the searches. That seems very clear.
Or, you could send a train full of passengers at full speed into another train full of passengers stopped at 34th st. Maybe they get the power turned off in time, maybe not. Planes are more dangerous than trains, but trains can be used to kill.
The thing that bothers me, like so much of this crap done in the name of “security”, is that the measures proposed are useless for combating terrorism, ( Really, think it through. You’re a terrorist, standing on a subway platform with a suitcase packed with explosives or nerve gas. A policeman comes up to you and demands that you submit to a search, do you: A: Twirl your moustache and say “Curses, foiled again!” or do you B: Detonate the bomb or release the gas, acomplishing your mission? Hmmm. ) yet leave themselves easily open for abuse in the name of whatever people in power might decide to use them for. “Random” searches of citizens would most likely have a profound impact on the drug trade in this country, putting a lot of drug users and dealers behind bars. I have no desire to live in a country where this is the norm, however.
Bricker, you must be a fine lawyer, because you have weaseling justification down pat. I generally agree with most of your posts, but you are also a perfect example of how civil liberties are going to be lost, if they are. It won’t be to the sudden appearence of jackbooted thugs, it’s be some government suit in a power tie arguing before a man or woman in a black dress that really, Your Honor, the desire of the government to afix thought regulators to everyone’s head is nothing new, and can be seen as a logical extenstion of Cecil VS Dope, Red VS Green and Spy VS Spy, nevermind that such a thing is completely anathma to the clear intentions of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution, we’ve got precident. T.S. Elliot suggested that the world will end not with a bang, but with a whimper. I contend that it will indeed end with a bang-the bang of some idiot’s gavel rendering the whole concept of due process, reasonable cause and burdon of proof meaningless.
Okay. I get that. But what precautions would you be fine with?
Here in DC they’ve removed trash cans, mailboxes, and newspaper vending machines from the train platforms, because these things could easily conceal bombs. Any unattended packages are responded to by police hazardous materials squads, and may cause a shutdown of the train line.
Does this seem like an overreaction to you, in light of what happened in Madrid? And keep in mind, there are no searches of passengers on the Metro.
A couple of things: Yes, I am starting to get rather judgmental about these sorts of things. It seems that we are having measure after measure that is pretty much directly assaulting the protections granted by the constitution, that have little or no actual value in making us any safer. That no one is screaming from the rooftops about this makes me angry, sad and afraid. It seems to me that we are on a very slippery slope right now, and no one is trying to get off of it.
That being said, I can see how the way that I communicated this did not add as much to the discussion as I might have hoped. In the end, the choice will be yours. I personally don’t know how I would react if a man with a gun and a uniform came up to me and demanded that I submit to an unreasonable search with no probable cause. I suspect that I would comply, and that makes me sad as well.
Understand, I’d shout it from the rooftops if only I knew which rooftops to stand upon. Suggest a way for me to protest this without getting arrested, and I’ll see what I can do, honestly. But getting arrested for this issue? I can see how it would do no good and much harm.
Nope. New York (and most other subway and rail systems, I’d at least assume) have a signaling system that both prevents a train from entering a section of the tracks where another train resides and stops it from running above the speed limit of that section. If either is violated (the train running a red light), a switch is tripped on the train that will put it into emergency mode.
The other big issue that I haven’t even addressed yet is the way that they always go about combating terrorism. It is a stupid process. The only good it does is inconviencing well-to-do citizens. Terrorist groups capable of planning attacks such as the ones in Oklahoma City, Madrid, and the WTC are more clever than most people would like to give them credit for. Especially NOW THAT THE MEDIA HAS MADE THESE PROCEDURES PUBLIC, they aren’t going to be hiding bombs in their backpacks anymore. Instead they’ll start stapling their bombs to the underside of the trains, or hiding them in the engines, or anything else that CTU hasn’t thought up to combat yet. I’ll be very surprised to hear that the police in Boston actually find anything from this procedure
Well, my guess is that the ballot box is the rooftop that folks that are unwilling to get arrested will need to use. I would further guess that it will take a combination of things; voters sending clear messages that they are unwilling to stand for this kind of thing as well as people of courage and conviction that are willing to get arrested and have this matter tested in court.
I suspect that not a whole lot of this will happen, because these sort of measures appeal to the notion that the people in charge are doing something to ensure our safety and they are showy and visible. Couple that with the sentiment that a lot of people have that only the people that have something to hide have anything to fear from this and you pretty much have a formula for continued erosion of freedom.
This actually brings up something that I have been thinking about for a while. Can anyone point to a single terrorist plot that has been foiled since 9/11? Is any of this doing any demonstrable good what so ever?
No, not at all, why should it? Those are all measures to seem prudent and sensible, and AFAIK, there are no guarantees of life, liberty and today’s USA Today as one rides to work being violated here. That’s no different than putting padding around exposed edges or a fence around dangerous wires, it makes a location safer. Who would complain about that? (Except perhaps the pampered who feel terribly inconvienced by having to stop at the 7-11 with the rest of us rabble to buy their daily paper. :rolleyes:. IMHO, Fuck 'em)
You can certainly count on me for that, but I’m wondering how much good it will do on this particular issue.
I suppose I could send a letter to my Senators. Kennedy might even listen. Kerry is likely too busy to bother at this point. Even so, what politician is going to take the stance of decreased security? Sounds like political suicide.
Here’s the problem: I admire people that get themselves arrested to protect the freedoms of all of us. I’m a great admirer of Larry Flint, Bobby Seales, and Abbie Hoffman. Those guys are heros to me. But when push comes to shove, I won’t take the risks that they did. Yeah, I am ashamed to admit that.
And no one wants to be the first to be seen to endanger our safety. Although I suspect that if anyone would, it would be Kennedy. Maybe I’ll write a letter to him.
I can’t name specifics, buy I do recall a few times when news sources claimed that feds had foiled a plot. I have no idea how credible these claims are.
Yea, that seems to be a lot of the problem. In a lot of ways, this sort of reminds me of the War on Drugs. Pretty much useless, and obviously not doing a lot of good but politicians all have the impression (probably correct) that to change the course is cutting ones own throat. I too share your shame at not being willing to be arrested on principal.
Here in NYC that would be pretty impossible.
For one thing you have a large number of stations (100+) running 24 hours a day.
So you have to have at least one person at each station at all times. Maybe two because some stops basically have a uptown and downtown station so a searcher for each side would be necessary.
Of course you’ll need extra people during the busy times.
This morning I just missed my train. I was running late anyway but during the 7 minute wait for the next train I was joined on the platform by about 75-100 people. This is not a ‘busy’ station. So you want to search the bags of that many people in that ammount of time because if I miss my train while somebody is trying to walk through the metal detector with a belt buckle that’s a little too big I’m going to be pissed.
Plus, I’M NOT GOING TO LIVE IN A POLICE STATE!
I WILL NOT BE SEARCHED EACH TIME I TAKE THE SUBWAY!
Given the utter impossibility of actually winning this so-called war in anything resembling a final manner, it becomes necessary to evaluate the impact of these measures as if they are to be made permanent. That is what’s freaking a lot of us out.
I agree. Which is why we need to discuss these matters in an intelligent fashion.
It seems pretty clear to me that this measure is driven by two factors. One is the desire of terrorists to screw with the political processes of democratic states, as demonstrated by the Madrid bombings. Another is their targeting in the past of transportation networks, again demonstrated by the Madrid bombings and by 9/11 itself.
I don’t think for one second that permanent checks on the Boston subways will be instituted. But there are special security precautions in place for the Democratic convention there.
Well-to-do?
On one of the subway lines, they’re banning anything larger than a briefcase through the DNC; that particular subway line serves a huge number of the service industry workers that work in Boston. Many of whom have to bring uniforms (in other words, large bags) to work, and have no other option than the subway to commute.