# Random searches on the New York Subway **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 21, 2005, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545 "2005-07-21T22:32:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/221 "2005-07-23T12:04:12Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > Oh goodie. Another “Terrorism for Dummies” list. > > Why haven’t any of those things happened, if they’re so simple, so easy to do? No sweat, just toss a hand grenade and stroll through the panick. No sweat, just clip a chain. No sweat, just rig a stack of newspapers. > > Seems you’ve found the ideal way to be a terrorist. Congrats. Why aren’t you? Well, I’d bet you’re a bit more intelligent than the average terrorist, for one. Maybe smart, logical people don’t become terrorists, for whatever reason. That’s one possibility. > > Another is that it isn’t as easy as you think. Another is that it simply hadn’t occurred to them (though the fact that it’s come so _easily_ to a few posters here leads me to believe that isn’t the case. I’m sure you can think of more reasons why none of those things has happened. Please share some more of your “no sweat” wisdom with us all. What the fuck are you talking about? Has your fear driven you insane? No one has said it was easy to deal with terrorist except you, right now. And have you just shit your pants because you think **Barbarian** has given the terrorists new ideas on how to get you? Before you go hide under your bed can you explain to me again why you think it’s a great idea to give up your constitutional right against illegal search on a plan that will not work. If you really feel we have to do _something_, why can’t it be something fun and less intrusive like, I don’t know, everybody has to do The Robot before they can put their MetroCard through the turnstyle. That’s less intrusive and just about as effective. Talk about whiny crybabies! _I wanna feel safe! I don’t care that it doesn’t work and people are getting their rights violated a few hundred times a day! Waaaaaa!_ Someone asked upthread about the constitutionality of this. The way the police are working around it is by not making them mandatory. You can refuse search. You just can’t get to work if you do. Or you can walk to another train station and do what you planning to do in the first place like go to work or blow it up. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/222 "2005-07-23T12:09:01Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > Here’s a better question. If it hasn’t happened yet, why are we giving in to these searches? Yet again, you’re missing my point. The things the searches are trying to prevent, someone either wearing or carrying a bomb onto a subway train, HAVE HAPPENED in London, fairly recently. The James Bond scenarios all the criminal masterminds here keep coming up with HAVE NOT happened recently, to my knowledge. See the difference? (hint: it’s the word “not”) If you’re going to say, “well they could do this, they could do that, and they could do a little of both, or they might do something completely different. . .” well yeah, they COULD. And we COULD protect against all that, at tremendous expense and tremendous curtailing of liberty. But why not try to protect against (or at least, put priority on) the things we know they CAN do and HAVE DONE? ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/223 "2005-07-23T12:10:23Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > Well, you’d have lost that bet for the past…how many years? The main question I asked in my post, and which you failed to answer, is “if all of those things are so simple to do, why do terrorists consistently rely on suicide bombings, or one step up, car/satchel bombings?” No one to arrest, interrogate, and confess about future plans. Hell, the war in Iraq has made sure that they don’t really have a shortage of new members, so it’s not like a few of them dying puts a big damper on things. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/224 "2005-07-23T12:10:49Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > What the fuck are you talking about? Has your fear driven you insane? No one has said it was easy to deal with terrorist except you, right now. And have you just shit your pants because you think **Barbarian** has given the terrorists new ideas on how to get you? > > Before you go hide under your bed can you explain to me again why you think it’s a great idea to give up your constitutional right against illegal search on a plan that will not work. If you really feel we have to do _something_, why can’t it be something fun and less intrusive like, I don’t know, everybody has to do The Robot before they can put their MetroCard through the turnstyle. That’s less intrusive and just about as effective. > > Talk about whiny crybabies! _I wanna feel safe! I don’t care that it doesn’t work and people are getting their rights violated a few hundred times a day! Waaaaaa!_ Congratulations, you’re a moron. First, point out where I said “it was easy to deal with terrorist.” I’ll wait. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/225 "2005-07-23T12:12:40Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > Someone asked upthread about the constitutionality of this. The way the police are working around it is by not making them mandatory. You can refuse search. You just can’t get to work if you do. Or you can walk to another train station and do what you planning to do in the first place like go to work or blow it up. Aren’t the subways run by NYC? I’m a country bumpkin, so forgive my ignorance. I just don’t see how they can keep you from getting on a public subway if you don’t submit to a search. That’d be like searching random cars on the road and if you don’t submit, back home you go. 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/226 "2005-07-23T12:13:54Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > Congratulations, you’re a moron. > > First, point out where I said “it was easy to deal with terrorist.” > > I’ll wait. How about you explain how these searches aren’t worse than doing nothing. I’ve been wait for that this whole thread. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/227 "2005-07-23T12:14:48Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > No one to arrest, interrogate, and confess about future plans. > > Hell, the war in Iraq has made sure that they don’t really have a shortage of new members, so it’s not like a few of them dying puts a big damper on things. So: It’s working out pretty well for them so far. Therefore, we should NOT plan for them to continue using this tactic. Have I got that right? ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/228 "2005-07-23T12:22:19Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > How about you explain how these searches aren’t worse than doing nothing. I’ve been wait for that this whole thread. > [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > How can you call it useless? You have to at least acknowledge that if a guy has a bomb, there is a chance that a cop will search him and find it. We may differ on the probability of it, but you can’t say that there is no chance. > > Thus, this is at least incrementally better than nothing. > [@fiveyearlurker](#): > > Something that doesn’t work 100% of the time is not something “THAT DOESN’T FUCKING WORK.” I’m pretty sure that a bomb could still be smuggled onto a plane, but that doesn’t mean we should pack up the security system there. > [@me](#): > > Let’s say, hypothetically, that you had a bomb in a backpack, and were planning to hop on the most convenient subway, ride it into the busiest station in New York on its busiest hour, and detonate it. > > Let’s then say there there’s a cop who stops you on the steps of this first, non-busy station. He checks your bag. Now, if he arrests you, no deaths. If you panic and blow yourself up right there and kill 10 people, that’s probably a lot less than if there was NO cop, you rode into the busiest station and then killed 100. > > Chances are slim, but they’re better than if there were NO searches. > [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Can you stop a suicide bomber? Not really. You cannot prevent people from walking the streets or leaving their homes with packages. Even if you search them, they can pick crowded places, even crowded search areas, to blow themselves up. The only thing you CAN do is make the most vulnerable places a bit less so. The NYC Subway has just stopped being the lowest hanging fruit. > > You do not plan a bombing that hinges on being fortunate enough to not be randomly searched. You pick a different target The terrorists work within the framework you give them. If you say “we acquiesce to the demands of plane hijackers” then their plan becomes - Hijack plane, be let freely into cockpit, fly plane into buildings. If you say “nothing that goes onto the subway is EVER searched” then their plan will use that. Change those rules, and their options change. Instead of going for an A train with 200+ people jammed on it, they pick a bus with 50. You are dense. Those are all from the front page, and most in direct response to your shrill-yet-vapid devoid-of-reason posts. For the final time (yeah, I’m idealistic): “A small chance” does not equal “no chance.” ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/229 "2005-07-23T12:22:33Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > Yet again, you’re missing my point. Boy I sure do miss that point. Seems like just yesterday it was here. Then it left, taking all of my joy with it. ☹ I just miss it so much. I’m sorry. I need a moment. > [@](#): > > The things the searches are trying to prevent, someone either wearing or carrying a bomb onto a subway train, HAVE HAPPENED in London, fairly recently. The James Bond scenarios all the criminal masterminds here keep coming up with HAVE NOT happened recently, to my knowledge. See the difference? (hint: it’s the word “not”) Right. I can just as easily say that it has _not_ happened in New York. See that. I can use the word “not” too. As long as you are saying that the searches are justified because they _could_ happen (“could” used because they have _not_ happened here yet.), then others can say that they won’t be effective because of other things the terrorists _could_ do. Since it has _not_ (ooooh there’s that word again) happened here, all you are doing is arguing a hypothetical. That leaves room for other just as plausible hypotheticals to be brought in. > [@](#): > > If you’re going to say, “well they could do this, they could do that, and they could do a little of both, or they might do something completely different. . .” well yeah, they COULD. And we COULD protect against all that, at tremendous expense and tremendous curtailing of liberty. But why not try to protect against (or at least, put priority on) the things we know they CAN do and HAVE DONE? How about we actually do something instead of just using a placebo? Might as well just give everyone in New York a bottle of calmative in case their humours go out of whack. Cause y’know, they COULD go out with all of the stress from the bombings that haven’t even happened yet. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/230 "2005-07-23T12:27:45Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > You are dense. Those are all from the front page, and most in direct response to your shrill-yet-vapid devoid-of-reason posts. > > For the final time (yeah, I’m idealistic): “A small chance” does not equal “no chance.” There’s also the small chance that doing The Robot will make the terrorist think he’s in a disco instead of the train station and go somewhere else. Why don’t we do that instead of violating hundreds of NYer’s rights? Because a small chance is better than no chance at all, right? Talk about devoid of reason! ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/231 "2005-07-23T12:31:00Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > There’s also the small chance that doing The Robot will make the terrorist think he’s in a disco instead of the train station and go somewhere else. Why don’t we do that instead of violating hundreds of NYer’s rights? Because a small chance is better than no chance at all, right? > > Talk about devoid of reason! Sure, there’s a small chance of that as well. And if you feel comfortable doing that, by all means go right ahead. Meanwhile, I’ll believe that an actual police presence as well as possible interaction with potential attackers might just have a little more effect. But I’ll be sure and bring a camera in case I run into your show. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/232 "2005-07-23T12:34:37Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > Sure, there’s a small chance of that as well. And if you feel comfortable doing that, by all means go right ahead. > > Meanwhile, I’ll believe that an actual police presence as well as possible interaction with potential attackers might just have a little more effect. > > But I’ll be sure and bring a camera in case I run into your show. And since you choose to believe fairytales hundreds will lose their rights. Because you and many like you are idiots. And **Eve** wonders why I’m so shrill and angry. It’s all the idiots. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/233 "2005-07-23T12:35:28Z")
So what’s your solution? Do nothing, because it didn’t happen in New York? You can also say that the 9/11 hijackers didn’t board their planes in NYC, so why increase airport security there? Didn’t happen there, right? ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/234 "2005-07-23T12:41:07Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > So what’s your solution? Do nothing, because it didn’t happen in New York? > > You can also say that the 9/11 hijackers didn’t board their planes in NYC, so why increase airport security there? Didn’t happen there, right? But they did increase airport security everywhere, right? And the solution would be to do something that would be effective. I know, it’s a hard concept to grasp. Just try to work with me. If we are going to give up our precious freedoms (well, some of us think that they are precious), we should at least do it for a plan with some measure of effectiveness, right? More than just a slight lowering of the odds of an attack. Is it really worth submitting to these searches because “something is better than nothing?” ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/235 "2005-07-23T12:51:42Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > But they did increase airport security everywhere, right? By your thinking, why should they? The planes took off in Boston, New Jersey and Washington D.C. THOSE are the areas we need to lock down, gentlemen! Didn’t happen here! Don’t worry about it! Maybe they increased major airliner security everywhere, I don’t know. I do know that in my hometown, there’s a small airfield that’s completely unsecured, and probably hundreds more like it across the country. > [@](#): > > And the solution would be to do something that would be effective. I know, it’s a hard concept to grasp. Just try to work with me. I know it’s hard to grasp, but try to work with me: What would you suggest, here? What’s “effective?” That’s what many people have been asking since the FIRST PAGE. And no one’s come up with an answer. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/236 "2005-07-23T12:53:33Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > So what’s your solution? Do nothing, because it didn’t happen in New York? > > You can also say that the 9/11 hijackers didn’t board their planes in NYC, so why increase airport security there? Didn’t happen there, right? I suggested bomb sniffing dogs and devices. The one thing that has been proven effective time and time again are detective work and intelligence. That works [, see?](http://www.brooklynonline.com/bkln.news/bombs.xhtml) P.S. At the time, I lived directly across the street from where Brooklyn On-Line is located on the map. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/237 "2005-07-23T13:08:23Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > I know it’s hard to grasp, but try to work with me: What would you suggest, here? What’s “effective?” That’s what many people have been asking since the FIRST PAGE. And no one’s come up with an answer. And from the FIRST PAGE the answer has been doing something stupid and non-productive is worse than doing nothing. If you must do something no matter how stupid that something is, perhaps you can think of something that does not violate people’s constitutional rights. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/238 "2005-07-23T13:10:35Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > And from the FIRST PAGE the answer has been doing something stupid and non-productive is worse than doing nothing. You have still not shown that to be the case. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/239 "2005-07-23T13:11:38Z")
> [@Garfield226](#): > > You have still not shown that to be the case. Yes we have. ---
**Author:** ![Garfield226](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Garfield226](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Garfield226)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2005, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545/240 "2005-07-23T13:16:19Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > Yes we have. Cite? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/random-searches-on-the-new-york-subway/313545.md?page=13)