If I was a terrorist, I'd hardly break stride on my way to a NYC subway
if I knew that IF (same chance as winning the lotto) I was stopped by
New York's finest, I could walk away from a potential search merely by
declining to be searched! The police have admitted publicly that anyone
who refuses a search is refused entry to the subway, BUT NOT DETAINED!!
Does anyone else see the lunacy of this vast expenditure of time and
money with basically a ZERO payoff in public safety? I'm sure the NYPD
would mention all sorts of legal issues with detaining someone who
refuses the search. Screw the ALCU--let's get tough with the scumbags
who want to destroy our country. Logic is in short supply; "political
correctness" hampers all meaningful (and more cost effective) ways to
combat terrorism. Why are grandmothers being carefully searched at
airport screening stations? When was the last time grandma blew up an
No, merely followed to his next terrorist club meeting. :-)
No matter how futile the effort is, the public wants to see its
government doing something.
Yes, there are such issues. Much of the press coverage of this plan
focuses on how random and racially neutral the process is going to be.
I don't believe any of that. For every white grandma searched, there
will be dozens of young Arabic males.
You arghed before finishing your presentation. What "meaningful and
more cost effective ways" do you advocate?
They won't follow everyone home who refuses to be searched. No manpower
and totally impractical.
Actually, I think the public wants EFFECTIVE measures implemented,
rather than token photo ops.
For starters, don't waste dollars hiring screeners to check people who
don't come within a million miles of fitting the profile of a potential
terrorist. That change will never fly, due to the whining civil rights
bozos, so I didn't mention it before. And don't forget our porous
borders. I know the limitations of our government, hence, my earlier
We'll get to pay higher airfares as soon as all the airliners are
equipped with anti-missle measures. And some of us will die during
future terror operations. Yet we still have morons who are bitching
about the detainees at Gitmo. go figure...
And how come long fingernails haven't been termed potential weapons like
I wanna go back to the good ole days of the Cold War.
CHEAPER, not "cheaply". Right now the counter-terrorism measures are so
ineffective, that the cost/benefit ratio is out of the ballpark.
Negative profiling would be a start. I'll let you figure out what I
mean by "negative" profiling...
On another note, not related to your cost question:
I was happy to see the patriot act extension was passed by the House.
This current epidemic of terrorism is not a game; we are at war with
these bastards and should avail ourselves of EVERY method to apprehend
their sorry asses. Civil rights activists can't seem to get their
priorities straight--what law abiding citizen needs to be concerned
about the broadened powers of the government in protecting them if they
aren't into committing atrocities themselves?? GB has the right
idea--over a million cameras are looking at public areas. If I'm not a
mugger or a thief, why the heck should I care if cameras are watching
over the streets and subways? I'd rather know the chances of being a
victim of crime are reduced because the cameras are there, rather than
whine about how intrusive the cameras are. It's not like there is a
live body watching all the feeds 24/7. The images are archived and
reviewed when an incident occurs. I'd be happy to see the same thing
here in the U.S. Of course I'm not talking about surveillance cameras
peering into one's back yard. What's the worse thing you think that the
cameras would catch the average guy doing? Picking his nose. Scratching
an itch. Whoopee. We already have far more cameras watching our daily
lives than you'd probably imagine. Most chain stores have cameras
inside and outside. Banks. Workplace parking lots. Airports. Why not
extend the coverage to most urban public areas (assuming the cost
doesn't put us all in the poor house)? I predict we will follow GB's
lead, even if it takes years.
You'd better hope some terrorist doesn't use a fancy wooden box to contain
explosives. You might get a visit from the FBI if you subsequently visit
your library and take out a book like "Taunton's Complete Illustrated Guide
to Box Making". Even though you're not a terrorist, how would you feel,
knowing that your library activities were probably being monitored for an
unknown period of time, and perhaps your e-mail and phonecalls, too?
It means targeting people based on their appearance. Cops do it all the
time to good effect. Searching grannies is just a nod to the civil
As for surveillance cameras, they are creeping into U. S. society quite
rapidly. All of the park-n-ride lots here in Denver have them,
ostensibly to deter thieves. And I don't know what those traffic-light
cameras are filming when they're not catching light-runners. :-)
The Brits seem to have taken off their gloves. I see today they ran
down a bombing suspect and shot him five times in the head - to avoid
setting off any explosives that may have been wired to his body. I
presume somebody got a good look at the wires before the guns came out.
I *hope* somebody had a good reason, and that he wasn't just a suspect for
pickpocketing who panicked. On the other hand, anyone who'd mess with the
cops in a London subway in the current environment can't be too smart.
Darwin at work.
Can you show that it is really being done to 'good effect'?
I am reminded of the LA paid police informant who admitted he
was giving police random addresses. He was considered 'reliable'
because police found illegal drugs or unregistered guns at
more than a quarter of the locations he gave them.
Makes you sort of wonder if there aren't multiple motives
on the part of officials who want to search commuters.
One of the problems noted with the racist 'drug courier' profile
used by the NJ State Police was that it included African
American as part of the profile despite the actual statistics
that showed African Americans to be under represented (less
common that amoung the general population) amoung drug couriers.
It seems the authors of the profile hadn't relied on any factual
information they just wrote the profile up based on what they
Think quietly for a moment. Try thinking like a high ranking person in the
NYPD. You know that this subway search thing is going to generate flak about
racial profiling, right?
Stop. Take your hands off the keyboard right now. Think quietly.
What purpose is served by searching a few people who are absolutely,
positively NOT terrorists? Hint: There *is* a purpose.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.