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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?”
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.
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.
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?
P.S. At the time, I lived directly across the street from where Brooklyn On-Line is located on the map.
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.
I just miss it so much. I’m sorry. I need a moment.