Police to Check Bags on NYC Subways ... 4th amendment anyone?
- Thread starter BerettaCougar
- Start date
randersonabq
New member
Fourth Amendment
The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit searches without warrants, it prohibits unreasonable searches. What is the definition of a reasonable search and, more importantly, who defines reasonable?
What we'll never know is how many, if any, terrorist acts were prevented by the possibility of being caught in a random search.
The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit searches without warrants, it prohibits unreasonable searches. What is the definition of a reasonable search and, more importantly, who defines reasonable?
What we'll never know is how many, if any, terrorist acts were prevented by the possibility of being caught in a random search.
A random search that they are allowed to WALK AWAY FROM if they feel at risk of being found out.
Contrary to your statement, we WILL know how many, if any, terrorist acts were prevented by this. The answer is ZERO. This plan does not have the POWER to prevent any terrorist acts.
And for your enjoyment, here is the text of the actual Fourth Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
A search without warrant IS an unreasonable search, by definition. And a warrant shall not issue unless there is probable cause to believe the execution of the warrant will discover the person or thing that the authorities specify.
Why do you find this difficult to understand?
Do you think they're doing RIGHT in NYC?
-blackmind
And your suggestion is?
I have no intention to enter into a pissing contest here. I know the efforts at the airport are pretty lame (I worked that area when the metal detectors were installed many years ago); I know that a search that allows a person to just turn away and prehaps try to board at another location is not much of a deterrent but I repeat, what alternative suggestion do you have?
As for the gang up on the hijackers thought, not a bad thought and perhaps a deterrent - ever tried to "organize" a bunch of terrified people? Speck killed 8 nurses in the same apartment with a KNIFE - surely after he killed the first one the rest could have jumped him! But they didn't!
The point that I was (am) attempting to make is not that some effort is better than none (but in many cases it really is) but that a problem unaddressed will always get worse.
A subway is little more than a tunnel with motion added - it makes a great place to explode a bomb - so how would you prevent that? You work with what you have to work with. Close the borders? Great idea, one I support whole heartedly but will that prevent and attack tomorrow? On next week?
Gather up all the middle eastern men and ship them out of the country? O.K. how long will that take? Join F.A.I.R., I did but so far that has not been done.
No, I'm not very smart - certainly not smart enough to know what can REASONABLY BE DONE NOW! But I have not read any better suggestions by any of those posting here. All I have read are reasons why we can't do this or we can't do that. Reminds me of the "friend" who was horrified to learn that I was carrying a concealed weapon - I guess they thought I was a bigger threat than someone who intended to harm them.
I am no fan of government but some rules are necessary to the survival of a civilized society. Sometimes those rules change due to circumstances - I would rather have my book bag searched than be trapped underground while my lungs filled with smoke. And whether you like it or not that just might be the choices involved.
Finally, your criticism of my example "white male" does not merit a response. I didn't post my reply to 'win friends and influence people" - Dale Carnegie can do that. I was attempting to say that, given the challenge of protecting the riders of the subway my response would be somewhat different, BUT I AM NOT CHARGED WITH THAT TASK. And no one who is has asked.
The stupid part of what was proposed is, most likely, an attempt to pander to those people who scream about violation of their "rights". Well, that very concept can get you killed. How loud would you scream if N.Y. said, "Everyone who enters the subway station will be strip searched" or, "All riders must remove all clothing and turn it over to the agent. Clothing will be returned at your destination station." That might work, but do you think it would be O.K.?
Reminds me of the little song we learned in driver's ed, "He was right, dead right, as he sped along, BUT HE'S JUST AS DEAD AS IF HE HAD BEEN WRONG.
We are not dealing with criminals who fear being caught, the people who blow themselves up don't care and they don't care about your rights either. Will they just hit the switch and blow up the area when challenged? I don't know and you don't either. But if they did, as horrible as that would be, would it not be better than when they were underground and the carnage was 10 or 20 times worse?
Not a big movie fan, but I saw one the other night, "The Seige" was the name of it (I think); found myself cheering for Bruce Willis - So you disagree? Again, suit yourself. New York currently does not recognize my concealed carry permit - that bothers me a whole lot more than searching my bookbag or your bookbag or ...
John
North Carolina and glad for it.
I have no intention to enter into a pissing contest here. I know the efforts at the airport are pretty lame (I worked that area when the metal detectors were installed many years ago); I know that a search that allows a person to just turn away and prehaps try to board at another location is not much of a deterrent but I repeat, what alternative suggestion do you have?
As for the gang up on the hijackers thought, not a bad thought and perhaps a deterrent - ever tried to "organize" a bunch of terrified people? Speck killed 8 nurses in the same apartment with a KNIFE - surely after he killed the first one the rest could have jumped him! But they didn't!
The point that I was (am) attempting to make is not that some effort is better than none (but in many cases it really is) but that a problem unaddressed will always get worse.
A subway is little more than a tunnel with motion added - it makes a great place to explode a bomb - so how would you prevent that? You work with what you have to work with. Close the borders? Great idea, one I support whole heartedly but will that prevent and attack tomorrow? On next week?
Gather up all the middle eastern men and ship them out of the country? O.K. how long will that take? Join F.A.I.R., I did but so far that has not been done.
No, I'm not very smart - certainly not smart enough to know what can REASONABLY BE DONE NOW! But I have not read any better suggestions by any of those posting here. All I have read are reasons why we can't do this or we can't do that. Reminds me of the "friend" who was horrified to learn that I was carrying a concealed weapon - I guess they thought I was a bigger threat than someone who intended to harm them.
I am no fan of government but some rules are necessary to the survival of a civilized society. Sometimes those rules change due to circumstances - I would rather have my book bag searched than be trapped underground while my lungs filled with smoke. And whether you like it or not that just might be the choices involved.
Finally, your criticism of my example "white male" does not merit a response. I didn't post my reply to 'win friends and influence people" - Dale Carnegie can do that. I was attempting to say that, given the challenge of protecting the riders of the subway my response would be somewhat different, BUT I AM NOT CHARGED WITH THAT TASK. And no one who is has asked.
The stupid part of what was proposed is, most likely, an attempt to pander to those people who scream about violation of their "rights". Well, that very concept can get you killed. How loud would you scream if N.Y. said, "Everyone who enters the subway station will be strip searched" or, "All riders must remove all clothing and turn it over to the agent. Clothing will be returned at your destination station." That might work, but do you think it would be O.K.?
Reminds me of the little song we learned in driver's ed, "He was right, dead right, as he sped along, BUT HE'S JUST AS DEAD AS IF HE HAD BEEN WRONG.
We are not dealing with criminals who fear being caught, the people who blow themselves up don't care and they don't care about your rights either. Will they just hit the switch and blow up the area when challenged? I don't know and you don't either. But if they did, as horrible as that would be, would it not be better than when they were underground and the carnage was 10 or 20 times worse?
Not a big movie fan, but I saw one the other night, "The Seige" was the name of it (I think); found myself cheering for Bruce Willis - So you disagree? Again, suit yourself. New York currently does not recognize my concealed carry permit - that bothers me a whole lot more than searching my bookbag or your bookbag or ...
John
North Carolina and glad for it.
progunner1957
Moderator
Blackmind Has Got It Right!
AY-FREAKING-MEN!!!
AY-FREAKING-MEN!!!
P.S. NYCPD will be searching CARS & Trucks randomly as well, or so I heard on the Local News... Welcome to America... Papers Please..
It is funny that this post comes about today, as I was talking to my mom lastnight (who grew up behind the iron curtain), and she remembers it be MUCH less invasive behind the Iron Curtain than in the current US model of so called Democracy. The only thing that she said is different is that they would come in the middle of the night and take you away and not tell you WHY... But that doesnt happen here now does it.. :barf:
It is funny that this post comes about today, as I was talking to my mom lastnight (who grew up behind the iron curtain), and she remembers it be MUCH less invasive behind the Iron Curtain than in the current US model of so called Democracy. The only thing that she said is different is that they would come in the middle of the night and take you away and not tell you WHY... But that doesnt happen here now does it.. :barf:
I'm sorry, but this kind of thing, in "Unintended Consequences," is what had everyday citizens killing cops and other government officials and bureaucrats. 
Were it the 18th century, we would be calling these "Intolerable Acts," and we would be staging a revolution.
As it is now, the leftist "government will save us" mentality that prevails is responsible for blind acceptance and capitulation to these police state tactics.
-blackmind
Were it the 18th century, we would be calling these "Intolerable Acts," and we would be staging a revolution.
As it is now, the leftist "government will save us" mentality that prevails is responsible for blind acceptance and capitulation to these police state tactics.
-blackmind
Well, John, "I repeat,"
who said I had to have THE working solution in order to point out, correctly, that THIS 'solution' isn't worth jack sh!t?!
You are operating under the fallacy that one cannot point out an incorrect answer without having the correct one.
You are apparently convinced that doing ANYTHING, even if misguided or blatantly ineffective, is better than waiting for a TRUE solution to occur to us.
-blackmind
watching television has eroded the attention span of the average american (~6 hrs/day worth) to what it takes to watch a sitcom, 5 minutes.
tv addicted americans are not able to get their mind around the fact that taking rights piecemeal will eventually leave them with no rights. especially when the tv tells them that it is the right thing to do.
right now after london, securing the subways seems like a good idea, just like securing airports and the patriotact seemed like a good idea after 9-11.
this is shortsightedness at it's best. caused by short attention span. caused by years of watching hours daily of television.
those of us that still have somewhat of an attention span know that this is not the solution to the problem.
and if we know this, than you can bet your bottom-bippy that the folks making these policies in the upper levels of government know this as well.
which means that it is being done on purpose and for a purpose.
mooreshawnm
New member
Preach on my brother blackmind, preach on!!
Shawn
Shawn
Ahh, and there lies the rub. There ARE NO BRAINS behind this program. It's all emotion and knee-jerk responses to "do something" even if the something being done is wrong.
Looks like Team Jihad wins another one with no risk and no casualties.
Edited to add:
Blackmind, you're my new hero.
I have a solution....
Do nothing....If people are worried about getting blown up on the subway THEY DON'T HAVE TO RIDE IT! Let the people arm themselves again. We the people are supposed to be the government. Let us govern ourselves and not be babysat by a bunch of old codgers that have no idea how REAL AMERICANS live. Let us POLICE OURSELVES!...... A novel idea I'm sure. I am not saying get rid of cops......I am saying make them EQUAL. We all know there is an "us vs them" attitude.....We need to use REAL COMMON SENSE. We need to take back our way of lives. I despise anyone who believes in a "POST 9/11 WORLD" It's BS the world is still the same as it was 100 yrs ago. People don't like other people and there are wars....OH WELL! People die its natural. The good guys always win! It's natural......Anyway I think I am rambling........
Do nothing....If people are worried about getting blown up on the subway THEY DON'T HAVE TO RIDE IT! Let the people arm themselves again. We the people are supposed to be the government. Let us govern ourselves and not be babysat by a bunch of old codgers that have no idea how REAL AMERICANS live. Let us POLICE OURSELVES!...... A novel idea I'm sure. I am not saying get rid of cops......I am saying make them EQUAL. We all know there is an "us vs them" attitude.....We need to use REAL COMMON SENSE. We need to take back our way of lives. I despise anyone who believes in a "POST 9/11 WORLD" It's BS the world is still the same as it was 100 yrs ago. People don't like other people and there are wars....OH WELL! People die its natural. The good guys always win! It's natural......Anyway I think I am rambling........
It's true. But it really makes me wonder...
How the hell did we ever end up in a situation where the majority of the population either is not smart enough to understand that we are being led blindly by people who couldn't think their way out of a paper bag, or are so unconcerned that they don't really care?
We really are in a desperate, desperate situation here. We have SHAMS for leader -- empty-heads who never offer anything even close to a real-world, useful solution to ANYTHING. And we have a population that either can't see it because they're stupid, or they agree with it because they're stupid and gullible. The rest of us, the minority with intelligence, have to suffer with it, and none of us is able to be loud enough to convince everyone that "the emperor has no clothes."
It is very very frustrating. It's not a surprise that living under these conditions occasionally causes some people to "snap."
P.S. I love being someone's hero! LOL! Thanks for sayin' so!
-blackmind
Not only TV has a lot to do with this but also "School". The dumbing down of America is working wonders for the people to be turned into sheep that will follow the orders of the government even if it means they will be leaping to their deaths of the edge of a cliff because it is "the right thing to do", common sense is dead in America, and if one still HAS "common sense", they are made out to be some kind of wacko that should be locked up for the saftey of the government (err people). :barf: 
Trapp,
There are MANY people that have NO choice except to ride the sub-way, or take the bus. Failing to do so would cause them to loss their means of earning an income, and therefore the roof over the heads, their children, wife, etc. Randomly searching people for NO reason just because there is a slim chance that one MIGHT find a "terrorist" intent on killing people is NOT JUSTIFIED at all. It is NO different that random searches of ones home, because there are most likely some terrorists living within the US, and those searches could "discover" those terrorists. How many people would be OK with a random search of a house (say 1 out of 100 or something), just to have the illusion of "being safe, and the gov doing something to protect the people". What NYC is doing is completely and utterly wrong on so many levels, but there are many that will see it as a "Good Thing" till they are the ones being searched. arrested for merely trying to ride on a bus or train, or whatever.
Trapp,
There are MANY people that have NO choice except to ride the sub-way, or take the bus. Failing to do so would cause them to loss their means of earning an income, and therefore the roof over the heads, their children, wife, etc. Randomly searching people for NO reason just because there is a slim chance that one MIGHT find a "terrorist" intent on killing people is NOT JUSTIFIED at all. It is NO different that random searches of ones home, because there are most likely some terrorists living within the US, and those searches could "discover" those terrorists. How many people would be OK with a random search of a house (say 1 out of 100 or something), just to have the illusion of "being safe, and the gov doing something to protect the people". What NYC is doing is completely and utterly wrong on so many levels, but there are many that will see it as a "Good Thing" till they are the ones being searched. arrested for merely trying to ride on a bus or train, or whatever.
Unlike Mr Bloomberg and his cronies, some of us still live in the United States of America, intend to stay here, and do not want Mr Bloomberg's world given sufficient access to change our nation into just another province of his (and others like him) world. Rather we prefer to keep as much of Mr Bloomberg's world out of our nation, and the oppression and volatile conditions that come with it.
This of course is just another part of what will be the ever-increasing "sadly, these kinds of security measures are necessary" which will be added one step at a time. Permanently. Since the "war" on a noun has no, and can not possibly have, a tangible end.
They know this of course, and will attempt to sweeten each step with the ubiquitous, "Are they intrusive? Yes, a little bit. But we are trying to find that right balance."
-----------------------------------------------
"It may look like war but it's peacekeeping" - Lt. Gen. Babacar Gaye of Senegal, U.N. force commander in Congo.
BerettaCougar
New member
I'm on the phone with NYPD now...
Non emercency line:
212 639 9675
212 306 7450: NYC human/civil rights
Non emercency line:
212 639 9675
212 306 7450: NYC human/civil rights
BerettaCougar
New member
Turns out EVERYONE says, its to make people safer, i asked how and they said to get bombs out of the subway...then they made referrence to england..
Jeez, EVERYONE CALL!!!!
Call this number instead of the two listed above it is the number for NYPD Public affairs and legal matters.
646 610 6700
Jeez, EVERYONE CALL!!!!
Call this number instead of the two listed above it is the number for NYPD Public affairs and legal matters.
646 610 6700