You are simply priceless!
First you spend half this thread claiming that you’re the person who wants hard facts and not mere speculation. Then, despite direct police assertions to the contrary, you claim (based on nothing more than your own feeling) that someone refusing a search would be followed by police.
Since these cops would normally, I assume, be on some other beat, what about the rest of the city?
My mom thinks so too.
I’m merely pointing out that had the data come back that 2000 of 8000 refused, then obviously targeting those who refuse for further scrutiny would be impossible. Because it was only five, it is entirely reasonable.
It seems that it was more an issue of overtime than pulling from other beats (though I could be wrong). So, it’s more a question of dollars.
But whether it’s feasible (in terms of manpower) is not the issue. The fact is that the NYPD and the Mayor’s office have very clearly stated on multiple occasions that anyone deciding to refuse the searches would be allowed to leave with no interference and no further action by the police. Your claim about targetting is nothing more than your own fantasy. Not only is it not supported by any evidence (which you constantly claim to want), but it is actually in direct contradiction to the available information.
I see your point, but don’t see it as a policy contradiction. The policy on random searches states that people who refuse can (and ultimately this proved true over the last week) walk away. It does not state that somebody refusing at 14th street station will be able to head to 23rd street station without police radioing ahead to officers there for another search.
If you are trying to use my words against me, save it. I fully admit that I have no proof to back up that this would happen. But, if a man smelling of flower water refuses a search, it is very reasonable (fantasy? Come on now.) to assume that a message will go out over policy radio to be on the lookout for him at other stations. Each station is not a vacuum. It would NOT have been reasonable to assume this if thousands of people had refused.
Also, it should be pointed out that the man with the fireworks (who was admittedly an idiot for getting caught) was caught in Hoboken, and never got near Manhattan.
Fiveyearlurker Do you believe the police and mayor are lying when they state that anyone who refuses to be searched will allow to leave without any further contact from law enforcement?
If you do, then how can acting “suspicious” cause a person to be followed? If you don’t believe them, how can you trust them to not abuse their power?
Further what do you think will happen to the “support” if it comes out that the Police are lying and targeting refusniks?
These are valid questions, and ones that I struggle with.
I argue from what I think the ideal situation should be, and the policy, as stated, and if it shows to be effective, seems to be that ideal situation.
I wouldn’t consider it an abuse of power to do target a “refusnik” who acts suspiciously for an additional search. I would, however, consider it an abuse of power to use that as an excuse to compel a search that otherwise would not have happened.
I’m willing to give the police and the mayor the benefit of the doubt that such abuses will not occur. If they do, you will see support, including my own, turn the other way.
By “target”, I mean request another search at the next station. I should have been more clear.
What does acting suspiciously mean? I’m sorry but a lot of your argument is based on this Snidely Whiplash idea of behaviour and that’s not how people act. Further how far do the police follow me? From 9th to 7th ave…to 5th ave?
How far do the police, which don’t have cops in every station ANYWAY, follow my suspicious behaviour? Are they now going to pull cops from other stations to follow ME as I walk cross town, to prevent me from entering the system at another point?
What’s my crime again?
I’d prefer not to be forced to rely on the veracity of cops and politicians. What they say today may not be operative tomorrow.
There are profiles (and I’m NOT talking racial, as that opens up a whole other thing) of people about to martyr themselves. I mentioned flower water, with which terrorisists often perfume themselves in preparation for the afterlife, as well as praying to themselves. Skin complexion differences on the face indicating a recently shaven beard, as well as shaved heads. Look at pictures of the recent guys caught in London, and it seems to fit (though I haven’t smelled them).
To answer your other questions, these situations will be dealt with as they arise. It appears to not be a big issue, as apparently the vast majority of New Yorkers are complying (and a slightly smaller majority are complying without reservation). The degree of police activity will depend upon the degree of suspicion that the police have about you. If the police see that you are just some college kid being self-righteous, then obviously they aren’t going to give you much attention. But, if you indicate any signs of imminent martyrdom, well, a “be on the lookout” with your description and direction toward the next stop is not uncalled for.
But the day that they use this suspicion based on gut to compel a search (without cause) is the day that they went over the line.
Just out of interest, to which of the 450+ New York area stations should they radio the warning?
Because, of course, it’s impossible for the terrorist to jump in a cab and go 30 blocks to a different part of town.
Lets remember that it was eight years between the first WTC bombing, and the horror of 911. If these bastards have a lock on anything, it’s patience. Does anyone believe that 8 years from now, there will still be searches going on? Five years? 6 months from now? We get complacent real quick. If I’m the mastermind giving the orders, I’d stay clear of the US for a long time. Remember how safe YOU felt on September 10, 2001? Time blurs our memories. The horse escaped back in 1993, it’s too late to try and close the door now.
My local tube station now seems to have between 1-5 officers in attendance during daytime. They occasionally ask people to show them the contents of their bags. This being the UK, I’m doubt there is any right of refusal without getting arrested. What all this is supposed to achieve, I don’t know.
As has been discussed to death already, finding a bomb won’t change anything other than the area that gets blown up, and there are plenty of holes in the system. Since my neighbourhood is approximately 70% muslim asians, profiling of any kind won’t cut it either.
The main benefit is the same as immediately after 9/11 - every cop who fits into a uniform is clocking overtime out on the street, so crime will be down massively.
However, the overtime alone is apparently costing something like £2m a day, and the Metropolitan police has already spent it’s entire contingency funds, so I guess we are either going to get robbed by the taxman instead or things will be back to normal soon. Last thursday was the only time so far I have seen anything approaching thight security on the tube, and that was achieved with two shifts of 3,000 officers each - that’s just not sustainable. link