Gothamist: Open Up Your Bags, Subway Riders

cap

Mon, 01 Aug 2005 13:47:05 -0500

Even Ike (Eisenhower) warned us about the despotic tendencies of the "military industrial complex", and Sup.Ct. Justice William O. Douglass, Patrick Henry, Daniel Webster...told us to beware and resist trading of our cherished, hard-won individual liberty for specious bureauratic "security". As noted by others, jails are real "secure" places, but not where most want to live. LBJ re. the Soviet threat used the analogy of the neighborhood bully: let him in your front gate, give in, next he's on your porch, chicken out, then he's in your kitchen, next he's in your bedroom... No different with any vast state/corporate bureaucratic law enforcement apparatus is it? Start fiddling with my individual liberty/privacy in ANY way, let alone capricously, fecklessly, like random bag searches, (presumably to enhance Nanny Big Bucks Tough-Guy-Come-Lately Mike's reelection ad campaign) then do we trust this is just a one-off, not an ongoing trend? Then what's next? When? Who decides?, will it be by fiat, by papal bull, by some Bush-Bloomberg panel set up to "protect" us into a captivity even more profound than the consumer-debt serfdom we already have? Jerk out of you political comas! The initial impression of Keystone Kops, jocular or "polite" officers shooting the breeze to put you at ease as you reveal your personal belongings...what new rule, what next legal step will suddenly mandate that we are borderline criminals for having a butane lighter, pint of bicardi or corkscrew in our bag? A lot of these "officers" are coming from outside NYC and from dubious backgrounds. MT, the untroubled 6-foot 2-inch Aryan-Saxon above was likely tapped PRECISELY to enhance simulacrum, offset any notion of racial profiling. Can anyone seriously doubt that it is the NYC Elite, the traders and brokers like him, the Trumps, Bloombergs, the MDs at Goldman and Morgan, risk-arb jockeys etc, whose plush lined pockets will get ripped the hardest by any deadly subway incident? Natch, they support bag searches. Like the Randy Newman song, "It's Money That I Love...". These swine would sell their kids into slavery and turn New York into a high-tech surveillance plantation for another dollar.

Things are not what they seem

Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:40:01 -0500

gross. " most people in the world are just trying to make a buck and stay out of trouble" that's just what is going to make this fucking facsist regime more powerful, and that's EXACTLY what these motherfuckers WANT us to be doing, so busy making a buck and staying out of trouble that we don't care anymore and are too scared to MOVE and too scared to care about our rights let alone be able to read them, we're too busy making a buck and staying out of trouble and WHY? Look different smell different have a different opinion, even CRY in public and you are open to ATTACK. Slip through the fingers of society and rot on the streets and everyone is too busy making a buck and staying out of trouble to care. Wake up, it's not a fucking virtue to be opressed and terrorized, it's a tragedy, and its' just what MR. President wants and will glorify until the cows come home because it serves him. And by the way, you're little "shut up rich kid " routine on me because I'm poor but guess what I still care.

Lady X

Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:29:40 -0500

It sounds like maybe umay is someone who really cares, by the way. This is supposed to be a public forum, what is so threatening to you about umay?

Lady X

Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:21:06 -0500

I think it's gross and horrible to slam someone for handing out 4rth amendment rights, and calling protest a luxury is really really naive and sad. I think it's beautiful that someone who may not be directly effected by something would care enough to add their voice. remember the song I didn't stand up and I didn't ask why and the day they came for me there was no one left to ask why? do you really want that to be you epitapaph? Anyway, as long as the police department are the representatives of the racist, mysoginist torture chamber that is " the "justice" system" ( better know as the lock them up and rape torture and fry "em collective) they can keep their animal paws off my damn bags. I think a good protest would be to make a sticky bean mixture and add those gross plasticy eyeballs and keep it in a tupperware only to release it into your bag just as the kind and gentle officer ran his fingers through your shit. anything that make s those criminals in a blue suit stronger than they already are is HORRIBLE.

par3182

Tue, 26 Jul 2005 00:46:15 -0500

I am a 6'2" blonde haired, blue eyed yuppieish guy hey MT, call me...

Redux

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 17:14:36 -0500

Stupid Bloomberg and stupid cops, what a team. Watch out, tomorrow they will ban tupperware. and to echo some other comments, can we please get the 80% who showed against Bush to throw out this billionare bobo!

tien

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:45:27 -0500

umay? who the hell are you? i'm pretty sure nobody knows you, so why do you preface your comment with "Those of you, who know me little better, can attest that it’s really hard to get me upset..."? are you just copying stuff from somewhere else? because i don't think anybody knows you.

real deal holyfield

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:26:28 -0500

what the fuck are you guys complaining about? don't you guys know that this just a knee jerk reaction to terrorist events? The main reason the NYPD will stop doing random bag checks is that it is TOO FUCKING EXPENSIVE! all that manpower devoted to stopping joe blow and plain jane on the street is totally wasted. The only thing this does is subconciously ease the minds of people who are planning to come to new york. It's a stall tactic to quell the fear. It's like raising the alert to orange from yellow. It doesn't matter if they check bags or not. It's the mindset that the NYPD and the government are doing something. If the NYPD did nothing people would be like "what the fuck? this government did nothing to stop the terrorists". This is just so if some shit did go down the authorities could go "YO we had bagchecks anc everything and we did everything we could so get off our backs that the empire state building got blown up". This is just to keep peoples minds at ease. If there were no bagchecks people wouldn't want to ride the subways or visit new york. Trust me, no cop wants to do bagchecks. It's a ruse, camouflage. It's the "freedom fries" syndrome. How does changing the name fuck up france? it doesn't. It just makes republicans feel better. same thing goes for bagchecks. It's a false security.

PR

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 15:19:29 -0500

Mayor Bloomberg wholehandedly supports this steamrolling of the 4th Amendment. Stop supporting Bloomberg, Democrats. Remember your Democratic values?

bernardo

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:17:26 -0500

i am not going to comment on whether these searches are constitutional or not and what they mean to our civil liberties. plenty of people have done that. i think though, that a lot of you are missing the point about what these "random" searches are supposed to be doing. they are by no means meant to be a 100% barrier against terrorism. the nypd, mayor, etc knows that if someone really really wanted to blow themselves up in the subways they would. what these searches are meant to do are to create an increased police presence that makes a terrorist attempt more difficult to pull off. they use this kind of tactic fairly frequently in fact. the counter-terrorism bureau that the nypd has created since 9/11 is actually pretty damn sophisticated (regardless of what you're thoughts are about the nypd in general). when they come across a piece of intelligence that seems real they will flood the location that is mentioned with as much police as they can. the intent is to make the area as hard a target as possible. if, for instance, they hear about someone casing the brooklyn bridge for a possible attack, they would flood the area for an indeterminate amount of time. they do this with the hopes that whoever is checking out the bridge to plan an attack would report back that the area is too hot and an attack at that time would likely prove unsuccesful. essentitially this is the same that is happening now. by using these random bag searches, the counter-terrorism bureau (as opposed to just talking about the nypd monolith in general) is hoping that potential attacks are thwarted by making things to hot. also, when talking about terrorists and nypd activities, it is usually the counter-terrorism bureau that is calling the shots. they are a very different animal than the rest of the nypd.

umay

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:42:51 -0500

Those of you, who know me little better, can attest that it’s really hard to get me upset, especially about politics. Even with my concerns for politics, I have developed a Zen like dispassion about it. I have accepted that world and human society is nothing like the one I would like to be in. So, there are always going to be things that could be different and it’s up to us to change it, create a world according to our dreams. Of course not all of our dreams are going to come true and we are not always going to succeed. Accept your defeats, take your victories, and move on – no need to get upset. This simple bit of political philosophy allowed me to stay sane in these distressing times. However, my calm little mental universe got severely disturbed by the recent developments in New York City. I got very upset by the announcement to randomly search people in the subways. The intensity of my emotion was actually a surprise to me. I guess I got upset because finally the troubles are hitting my home. The random searches, hassles in the subway, potential abuse of power by the police are all very serious issues but none of those got me upset. What really pushed my button is that people conceded to the move. Reports indicate that New Yorkers seemed to agree that the security of their lives is more important than some civil liberty issues. Of course after the London bombings, you can’t really blame them for conceding to Bloomburg. But blame them I will for it is more than mere acceptance of some inconveniences, it is the acceptance of the Boogie Man. One major difference between the War on Terror and all the other previous American War is that the War on Terror lacks a well defined enemy. At one point, the enemy was Osama, then the Talibans came, then it was Saddam. You could have even stretched to include the Axis of Evil in your enemy camp. But they are the things of the past. Right now there is no definite enemy. There is no nasty villain that you could defeat to save the world. The enemy seems to be some sort of mysterious force, spontaneously self generating, thoroughly scattered in all parts of the world, totally random, entirely unpredictable and always potentially murderous. In this postmodern world the enemy is also postmodern; it is the enemy that seems to behave like things in quantum physics and follow the Uncertainty Principle. Or the enemy might not be a postmodern one at all. It looks like the good old Boogie Man. If one believes in the Boogie Man, let fear define his/her life, and want to take precautionary measures, as silly as it might appear to me, it would hardly be of my concern. But it is my concern; for one it is the all powerful state that I live under, which is being silly but more importantly, the Boogie Man looks like me! No matter how postmodern the world might be, it is still hard to fight a war without the enemy personified. The War on Terror has no actual enemy but it has many potential ones. The rouge nations of Middle East might be the enemy, some extremely organized professional terrorist organizations might be it, or it could be some alienated Muslim youths. To hell with all the possibilities, let’s just treat the whole of the Brown race, specially the young ones, as the potential enemy. Like Fanon I see the little girls of this world clutching their mothers’ hands for security and screaming with fear upon seeing me: Look there is a Brown man, look there is a Brown young man, look there is a little Muslim boy, look there is my potential murderer, look there is my enemy! Of course this is not a new development. It has been a long process in making. I have felt like the enemy at various airports and my visits to other parts of the United States before. I have been called Osama several times. I accepted the crudity of people because I was safe from them for the most part. In my home, in New York things were different. In this isolated island of multicultural heaven, where no little girl ever screamed and I went about my business quite normally. But now things are to change, they are already changing and it’s not my safe home anymore. Police search is going to come for sure, it’s only matter of time. But am I going to also hear the little girl scream? With New Yorkers conceding to the measure it seems that they have swallowed the entire pile of bullshit. I guess their concern for the security of their lives is greater than their concern for their values. I on the other hand would risk my life any day instead of subjecting myself to the state fear. But then again their pathetic little lives might be more valuable than mine. The whole thing got me really mad. I got so mad at New Yorkers, Bloomburg, Bush and the whole thing that I wanted to go out to union square, open my backpack and empty all of its contents for official scrutiny, pull down my pants along with my boxers, part my ass crack for better viewing, and scream: there is no Weapon of Mass Destruction hidden here! I won’t do that of course. For one, I am too timid and “civilized” to be that assertive. But more importantly, NYPD has been known to shove things up peoples butt before. I don’t want to take that chance on my virgin ass. But what I am going to do is to look for the subway police everywhere and even before they ask me, I would insist that they check my belongings out and give me the green signal of “this meek little fucker is still a potentially dangerous person but he got nothing this time”. This would be my little protest. Any one else want to join?

Johnie

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:11:08 -0500

Firstly: "Me", what's to say that this is where it ends. First it's illicit search of personal property [which, incidentally, is in the constitution], what will be next? Going by your logic, people shouldn't worry if they search your car, you house, or even bring every 5th person on the subway down to the police station for questioning if you have nothing to hide. Even if you stand by the "I'm ok with it since I have nothing to hide..." You have to realize how ineffective this procedure is. They say they are not going to racial profile but will be using a system where every X person will be checked. How does that prevent anything? They are not searching every station. In addition, they have stated that it is not probable cause if you refuse to be search and leave the station. Don't you think a suicide bomber would just walk 10 blocks to another station that is not being searched?

me

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:04:37 -0500

Oooh, is that "Josh" of flyer fame posting? Our friends at Slate have done a much better job explaining the constitutional issue than the soapboxers here. http://www.slate.com/id/2123278/

Josh

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 12:19:24 -0500

If they find something else illegal while searching for drugs, that something else is probably admissible against you in court, provided the whole random-search thing is constitutional in the first place. Sad but true - this what the Rehnquist Court hath wrought (and the Burger Court before it).

warbler

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 11:43:15 -0500

That sign looks like it should also say "Today's Special: Tomato Soup, Side Salad and Tuna Melt for $5.99"

jt

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 11:20:14 -0500

Dingleberry, your comment is one of the funniest things I've read in a long time. Thanks for making me laugh. More seriously, I have to say I am far more worried about the state of our democracy than the threat of getting blown up. For sure there is going to be some terrorism in the US, and probably in New York. Which is bad. But I'm very disturbed by the number of people that think throwing about liberties that people have fought for and died for is the way to approach the problem.

jesus cristof

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 11:09:17 -0500

how come they allow you to bring bombs on a a train and nobody stops from blowing it up but if they see you put your feet up on an extra seat they give you the third degree? outrageous!

Dingleberry

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 11:04:33 -0500

Killer Tupperware. Have you seen the news? the bombs were placed in gallon plastic food containers. How are bomb sniffing dogs gonna get a whiff? Just be on the lookout for shifty looking motherfuckers who look like they are about to be tossing salads.

baggin' it

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:52:32 -0500

I haven't seen any bag check stations set up anywhere, but my coworker was stopped this morning--INSIDE Times Square, on the 2 platform, as she was EXITING the train. The cops were jerks about it too, dumping her feminine products all over the table even after she asked them not to display her personal items to the general public. How is this helpful? I will not consent to being searched, and if it means I have to leave the station, so be it. I consent to being searched at the airport because EVERYONE is searched. I consented to being searched when I worked at the UN because EVERYONE is searched. If the MTA were to insitute across-the-board checks for contraband while lifting the idiotic beverage rules, I would consent to being searched. These random checks are not helpful, will not result in terrorists being stopped, and are only taking cops away from doing things that could be more helpful--like patrolling the stations in general to stop things like the woman who was stabbed at the J station the other day. The police are already putting in so much overtime that pretty soon stress, overwork, and lack of sleep are going to lead to some serious abuses. It's a violation of the Fourth Amendment, and any petition or lawsuit I can attach my name to will have my signature. The whole situation is not aimed at making us safer--it's aimed at making us more afraid, more willing to look toward President Shrub as our leader and protector. I think they're hoping to drum up support for the war at a time when it's lacking, hoping that a nation in fear will want to "defend" themselves against a people ravished and destroyed and on the brink of civil war due to our interference. Anyone who resorts to bombing anything is taking the wrong route--and I apply that to the war we started as well as to the bombers in London.

Kambri Crews

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:48:40 -0500

A potential bonus side effect might be a general decline in subway crime because of the increased police presence. But, yeah, I think bag checking is generally ineffective in preventing terrorism and all for show. Something I am truly concerned with is why many (most?) doors between cars are locked and marked "Emergency Only." So, how do you get out of a burning or smoke- or poison-filled car? You don't. Sometime in the last few days, I read that the MTA has no intention of changing the rule that those doors remain locked citing "daily saftey" as the issue. Of course, I now can't find the article that addressed this but I will be sure to go out of my way to ride in the car with the conductor.

sniffer

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:35:25 -0500

"they're not...each dog including training comes to about $10,000. They often have to be flown to other cities police departments because there are so few of them" Yes but after the initial 10 grand, it is pretty cheap. As far as I know the dogs do not receive a salary. Sure they pay his "Partner" but other than food costs do they pay the dog?... Uh NO. Cost is a STUPID reason not to use dogs. I bet it is the cops who downplay the dogs because THEY want the overtime pay. Within a year more dogs can be trained and deployed if people just wake up and realise thet it is more cost effective in the long run. More accurate than bullshit random bag checks, and will not violate civil rights. Lets waste a few more billion in Iraq, but we can't spend 2 million for 200 dogs? Flat out fucking stupid. Bag checks are CYA bullshit theater.

b

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:03:17 -0500

'I am sure in the long run dogs would be cheaper than all the overtime they pay the NYPD.' they're not...each dog including training comes to about $10,000. They often have to be flown to other cities police departments because there are so few of them

Brightliner

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:57:39 -0500

I cannot believe that people are making such a fuss over this. Big deal, the cops look in your bag for all of 30 seconds (as they did with mine). The alternative is being blown up by some nutjob. This is a small price to pay for safety. It would be small price to pay for safety, except it doesn't give you any safety. Do you think so much as one bomber would ever be arrested under this policy? Not when they have the option to walk away. Besides, if I were a bomber, it'd be pretty darn easy to circumvent this, considering they're not really random. If I saw that they were stopping every fifth person, it'd be fairly easy to make sure I wasn't the fifth person. Especially if I had an accomplice or two who could switch places with me. I have a question. If they are searching your bag to find bombs, but they find something else, like drugs, will they arrest you? Do they have the right to arrest you? They say they will arrest you if you're carrying any other kind of contraband. Whether they actually have the right would be the basis of a court case.

mig

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:57:24 -0500

a PR stunt, and one that leaves actual in-progress crime much more free to happen elsewhere in the city. anyone who thinks the bag-searching has *any* actual meaning, outside theatrical, is kinda crazy.

mig

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:56:03 -0500

a PR stunt, and one that leaves actual in-progress crime free to happen elsewhere in the city. anyone who thinks the bag-searching has *any* actual meaning, outside theatrical, is kinda crazy.

Phil

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:53:47 -0500

I saw a bag check table at 86th and Lexington on Saturday afternoon, but the police folded it up and took it away in the time it took me to get a farecard from the machine. It was like they set up the table just to check one guy's backpack, then left. They were back at 86th St this morning and I barely gave them a glance. The whole bag search policy is completely stupid for reasons that have been enumerated already. Even the dumbest bomber could find their way around these searches. I doubt they'll last more than a week before they're quashed by lawsuits or ineffectiveness.

bob denver

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:43:28 -0500

They should outlaw the fanny pack if not for safety reasons then aesthetic reasons. It's funny that white guys feel the need to go to minority neighborhoods and hand out flyers instructing them on what they should think. They probably were having flashbacks to the old country when their colonialist masters would lecture them on proper comportment and probably fear the flyer pusher more so than the bag inspecter.

linda

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:39:29 -0500

Bob gets the point across and is entertaining at the same time. drinkingwithbob.blogspot.com/

jojo

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:38:20 -0500

what about my right to carry concealed weapons? and Pornography? and Dildos? the cops just want an excuse to shoot to kill. fun without a limit.

asdf

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:35:42 -0500

I don't think bag searching would be that big a deal, IF it helped prevent terrorism, which it almost certainly doesn't. It's just a cynical CYA move by the NYPD, so that IF something happens here, they can say, "well, we tried." A pretty lame one, at that. If you're concerned about civil liberties violations, worry about the extension of the Patriot Act, not a relatively unobtrusive, 30-second, optional search of your backpack. What no one seems to be able to admit is the truth. Which is that it's absolutely impossible to stop someone with the means and the motive from pulling off an attack like this. And even if we could stop a bomber from entering the subway, they'd just blow themselves up at the subway entrance. Or at any public space packed with people.

sniffer

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:34:31 -0500

"I'm sure they thought about that, but then realized they don't have 1000 bomb sniffing dogs nor the money to obtain them" I am sure in the long run dogs would be cheaper than all the overtime they pay the NYPD. But then again why would the NYPD get behind the dog idea, when they can make extra money with all the overtime? Bottom line we are letting our civil liberties erode for a false sense of security because doing the right thing is too expensive, but we waste billions in Iraq. This is a downward spiral that will never end.

anna

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:31:39 -0500

I have a question. If they are searching your bag to find bombs, but they find something else, like drugs, will they arrest you? Do they have the right to arrest you?

b

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:28:29 -0500

'Now, having Bomb sniffing dogs at entrances would be less invasive and much more accurate. But why do the smarter thing? After all ithis is the NYPD and they have proven time and time again, most of their actions are poorly thought out.' I'm sure they thought about that, but then realized they don't have 1000 bomb sniffing dogs nor the money to obtain them

the constitution's ghost

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:25:59 -0500

The bag searching itself not really a big deal, however the principle *is* a big deal. If you know anything about political systems, goverments and their pasts, you'd see how the bag searching is a sign of future trouble. Think about it--why did our forefathers even bother writing the Fourth Amendment in the first place? The American Constitution was masterfully designed; the more we veer away from it, the worse off things will be in the long run. Why? Because once too much power is transferred to the government, years from now we might have leaders who can legally take over our lives and do as they please. Sound far-fetched? It's happened to mankind many times for thousands of years. Don't be an ostrich and stick your head in the sand.

janine

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:22:52 -0500

me: I don't know if it's beyond you to understand your Constitutional rights or if you do understand but are too cowardly to care about it, but this story is a big deal.

db

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:22:08 -0500

"Protesting is a luxury only the wealthy and/or subsidized by parents have" That's a stab at sarcasm, right?

sa

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:22:06 -0500

Yes, protesting is a luxury only the wealthy have. That must be why all those wealthy black people protested in the South in the 50s and 60s.

kowgurl

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:22:00 -0500

But aren't they only checking you if you get on at a busy station like Times Suqare, what if you're coming from way out in Queens with your enormous backpack full of TNT , will anyone check you getting on a train way out there? I dont get it...

Sniffer

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:11:37 -0500

Bag searches by cops are bullshit and ultimately will prove to be ineffective. Now, having Bomb sniffing dogs at entrances would be less invasive and much more accurate. But why do the smarter thing? After all ithis is the NYPD and they have proven time and time again, most of their actions are poorly thought out.

bt

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:57:12 -0500

Dear Josh the immigrants rights/flyer guy: Protesting is a luxury only the wealthy and/or subsidized by parents have. Most people in this world are just trying to make a buck and stay out of trouble. And you wonder why no one took your flyer?

tien

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:55:20 -0500

MT, you clearly match the new breed of scandinavian looking terrorists. i don't think i've seen police inspecting any packages at all since it started.

MT

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:52:59 -0500

I managed to get pegged at the South Ferry subway station this morning. They seemed to be picking people fairly randomly. I can assume they are not doing any racial profiling as I am a 6'2" blonde haired, blue eyed yuppieish guy and probably don't match the profile of a middle eastern terrorist. I have to at least say the cops were nice about the whole thing. I was pretty loaded down and they seemed to be trying to make it as easy for me as possible. I was done in maybe 20 seconds.

me

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:50:13 -0500

Scott

Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:47:26 -0500

I'd be surprised if any New Yorker took a flyer from anyone for any reason.