Subway Shakedowns

[dogday]

Necessary Security or Unconstitutional Violation?

New York City police are now conducting random searches of subway passengers in a program of stepped-up security following the London subway and bus blasts earlier this month. Civil liberties groups say the searches are unconstitutional and ineffective. We host a debate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will random bag searches on public transportation make Americans safer? Following the July 7 bombings in London, New York increased police presence on the city's vast subway system at a cost of 1.9 million dollars per week. And starting Friday, police began random searches of passenger bags at selected subway stations throughout the city. New Jersey transit police began searches on Monday. Police officials say that passengers going into the subway who wish not to be searched can choose not to ride the subway.
An editorial in Tuesday's New York Times urged the city to continue the searches for an extended period. The editorial reads "Travelers have long since gotten used to extensive searches before they board airplanes, and they should be relieved to see security measures on the subways and commuter trains as well."

But questions remain about the effectiveness of searches that cover only a small fraction of subway ridership. And civil liberties groups say the searches are unconstitutional under the 4th Amendment, which guards against unreasonable search and seizure. City officials say the mandate to deter terrorism represents a special need and justifies the practice.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/28/149236

[K-W]

1. A letter in one of the NY Free Dailies

I think it was Metro, pointed out that bombers wouldnt even have to walk to the next station as most stations have multiple enterances.

We are talking about possibly delaying an attack 5 minutes, and for that we have basically made the search and siezure protections in the constitition completely meaningless.

[Beetwasher]

5. Yup, It's A Joke, Most Stations Don't Have Searches

So a bomber would just get on somewhere else...Pathetic, useless and pointless chipping away at our rights.

Airport searches and searches at federal buildings are mandated by law. If they want to do this, let them try to pass legislation.

[SmokingJacket]

2. As someone pointed out... if a bomber refuses to be searched, he can

just go to another subway stop. There is NO actual increase in safety -- it's just the illusion of safety that they're working on here.

They're sacrificing privacy for the illusion of safety.

[1932]

3. I have three words: Bomb Sniffing Dogs.

[GreenPartyVoter]

4. Thought this was another Jared thread

[wli]

6. time for a class action civil rights lawsuit?

Maybe... OTOH the Federalist Society will probably laugh it out of federal courts.

[zbdent]

7. ACK! The subject line made me think of (pre-weight-loss) Jaret

dancing . . .