Screw the Constitution! At least "the trains will run on time"

G

Greg Bell

New member
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal judge ruled on Friday that police had a constitutional right to randomly search passengers' bags on the New York City subway to deter terrorist attacks.

U.S. District Judge Richard Berman ruled the searches were an effective and appropriate means to fight terrorism, and constituted only a "minimal intrusion" of privacy.

"The risk to public safety of a terrorist bombing of New York City's subway system is substantial and real," Berman wrote in his opinion.

"The need for implementing counter-terrorism measures is indisputable, pressing, ongoing and evolving."

Random bag searches began on July 22 after a second set of bomb attacks on London's transit system.

In a statement, Mayor Michael Bloomberg praised the ruling, calling bag searches a "reasonable precaution" that police would continue to take.

The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), which had sued to stop the searches, plans to appeal, Executive Director Donna Lieberman said in a statement. She said the "unprecedented" bag search program violated a basic freedom.

More than 4 million people a day ride the 101-year-old subway system, the nation's largest.

The NYCLU had sued the city and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly in early August, calling the policy of searching thousands of passengers a day without any suspicion of wrongdoing unconstitutional.

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits searches without probable cause.

Police had argued random searches were a crucial deterrent to a possible attack.

The frequency of searches increased in October after Bloomberg said the FBI alerted him to a specific threat to the subway system. Searches were later reduced after the federal warning passed without incident.
 
No surprise, the international banker created "new world order" has ooozed from New York City since almost day one, even prior to 1913. The Council on Foreign Relations is there, the extremely powerful Federal Reserve Bank of New York (the controlling head of the federal reserve creature) is there, and the United Nations, er I mean, Corporate Banker-Influenced Governments is there.

This is a state that had Nelson Rockefeller, one of the most knowing of conspirators, from the most subversive family in American history, AS GOVERNOR. One of the biggest agendas of the powers-that-be was shredding the constitution (specifically, most of the bill of rights) by creating a so called "drug war." To this day, the utterly insane, illogical, and heavy handed drug laws in New York are called "Rockefeller laws." Those subversive laws, and the mental brainwashing that went with them seemed to have a home base in New York, just like everything else since at least 1913 that subverts liberty and the constitution.

twistedgun.jpg


The "trains running on time" reference to the Nazis fits New York perfectly because it's extremely common knowledge now that curiously, certain wall street bankers funded Hitler as much as they could and as long as they could before we entered the war. It was almost as if a global system of power WANTED a predator to start a world war so that the outcome could be managed to re-order the world in a way the "United Nations" and several other organs of world power would rise from the ashes. The international bankers would, of course, NEVER do such a thing. I mean, it's not as if they spent centuries manipulating the fates of nations or anything. It's not like they have a lust for power or anything, I mean, they've only got identical central banks in effectively every nation now, but that is totally harmless power. The fact that gun bans have gone worldwide, following the same pattern (I've counted several nations that enacted virutally identical registration laws within just a few years of each other in the 1930s), ever since those central banks were established has NOTHING to do with it I'm sure.
 
Yeah but what are you going to do? The system is too big to fight now. You can rally and stage sit-ins all you want, it won't make a dent in the big picture problem. And if you did somehow become a legitimate threat to the machine, you'd just disappear.:mad:
 
Funny, somehow subway searches will cause the republic to fall, but we've been search everyone before they get on airplanes for decades now.

Need I remind people about Madrid and London? Transportation systems are a primary target for islamofacist terrorists, and NYC would be crippled without it's subway. NYC has already been hit twice by them, to do nothing would be the height of folly.

And this is for MasterPieceArms.com:
afdbhead.jpg

Remember, shiny side out.
 
Rebar,
We have a *right* to freedom from illegal search and seizure. It is every bit as important as the right to bear arms.
 
Wrong.

You have the right againt unreasonable searches and seizures. Read your BoR again. In this case the judge found that it wasn't unreasonable, given the facts.
 
We put that part about illegal search and seizure in the constitution because the Brits did that to the colonists over 200 years ago .We didn't want that to happen again. Unfortunately there are many who think that search and seizure is the answer to making a "safe" country !! Read your history books .:mad:
 
Unfortunately, the ruling may be upheld. :(

Random searches are being performed. Not everything is being searched, just random searches.

The high court has often held that random searches are constitutional. Reference customs searches to see what I mean. As long as the search isn't part of a pre-conceived plan to target a specific group or class of citizen it's legal and constitutional.

As a side note, the airport searches AREN'T constitutional since everyone is being searched and required to remove their footwear. The constitutional prohibitions protect against unreasonable searches and there is NO exception for "security reasons" or "minimal intrusions".

Rifling everyone's carry-on bags and mandating that they partially disrobe is hardly "minimal" and certainly doesn't increase security when they totally fail to screen checked baggage that goes on the same planes.

Random is OK, total search of everyone's posessions & persons isn't.
 
I don't know how I feel about this.

On one hand, they do have reasonable cause/suspension because those that we are at war with have 1) did so in spain and britian and 2) have said they wanted to do so here in the US.

On the other, it does seem like an invasion(sp) of privacy.

Then on the other hand (I grew up near a nuclear reactor :D) you have a set profile/stereotype of what characteristics to look for that fits the enemy.

But, on the other hand you don't want to subject people with these characteristics to single them out because of this when it's only a fanatical 1% (or a small amount more) that are the cause and the actual enemy.

To me, this one isn't cut and dried, black or white, too much grey to contend with. Now, if I re-read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and it has no grey when it comes to the issue then I will have to go with freedom and rights over security.

The 4th amendment, to me, is harder to nail down with what is considered unreasonable and what is reasonable compared to the 2nd.

The 2nd is straight forward and easy to understand and all laws pertaining to it (against it) are unconstitutional but this one, I'm not sure if the ruling is or is not correct.

Basically what I am saying is that I'm not a constitutional expect but the ruling may be within the boundey(sp) of being constitutional.

Hence the reason I don't get paid the big bucks :(.

Wayne
 
I bet this is causeing alot of problems for the junkies that ride the subways. Can't hide their dope, which fouls up the drug trade so my guess is they will forget the bombs to keep the trade going. Just buy off the judges like always.
Don't you love NY:D

25
 
U.S. District Judge Richard Berman ruled the searches were an effective and appropriate means to fight terrorism, and constituted only a "minimal intrusion" of privacy.

"The risk to public safety of a terrorist bombing of New York City's subway system is substantial and real," Berman wrote in his opinion.

"The need for implementing counter-terrorism measures is indisputable, pressing, ongoing and evolving."
Click to expand...

Seeing as how "The risk to public safety of a terrorist bombing of New York City's subway system is substantial and real," and these searches are now okay, it should therefore be okay to search and pat down anyone and everyone with brown skin and middle eastern facial features - right?

Or do these "indisputable, pressing, ongoing and evolving" searches only apply to white, black, Asian and Native American people?
 
The constitution was written to be easy to understand,theres no secret meanings,no hidden facts..just plain english. I dont believe it was written to be discarded like an old rag.some might consider this as "reasonable" just as some would consider having shirtless sleeves as bearing arms of the 2nd ammendment.well.....one thing leads to another and another till its all gone.incremental is what its about.

weve gone about pleasing everyone else that we've lost track of what this great country was founded upon and the sacrifices that got us there.
 
If this is reasonable, then we're only guaranteed freedom from searches and seizures in some location until terrorists detonate a bomb in that location, or some place sufficiently similar. What will we do if terrorists start bombing restaurants, movie theaters, and sidewalk crowds? What would be reasonable then?
 
This section of the Bill of Rights is written with little doubt of its intent...

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.

I see nothing in there about random searches or searching everybody. I do see that probable cause is needed.

The road to tyranny usually starts with those in power wanting to promote the safety and security of the people. We are letting our rights be taken away a straw at a time. By the time people realize it, its to late. For some reason folks assume that Freedom should be painless. Freedom is never painless a price will always be paid by our citizens for it. So in order to feel no pain we are willing to give our freedoms up for a sense of false security. Searching folks at random is not going to stop terrorists. the UK has cameras on steetcorners, did that stop the bombings? There are folks overseas who would trade the safety and security of the state they live under for the freedoms we enjoy without hesitation.

We have two choices

We can trade rights for a "feeling" of security or we can take our rights back and be a part of ensuring safety for our citizens. Instead of the idea that the government should be responsible for our safety.
 
We can trade rights for a "feeling" of security or we can take our rights back and be a part of ensuring safety for our citizens. Instead of the idea that the government should be responsible for our safety.
Click to expand...
I'm amazed at the overwrought apocolypic posts here.

Random subway searches in one city in America is not the end of the republic. If it really bothers the people involved, simply vote in new representatives and change the policy. Local politics at it's finest, which is exactly how the system is supposed to work.
 
I am sure that the gun owners in England, Canada, and Austalia were called apocalyptic when they protested against the new gun laws. Now there guns have been confiscated.........
 
No one is making them ride the subway. If you want to use public transportation, you get to deal with some invasions of privacy. Ride an airplane and chance getting strip-searched.

Someone smarter than me gets to define what is "reasonable" and what is "unreasonable" about searches under the Constitution. But regardless, everyone will not be satisfied with the answer. Some will always complain.
 
So if someone smarter than you tells you to go jump of the Empire State Building, are you going to do it?

The Bill of Rights is pretty straightforward...

The same smart folks bought you the GCA of 68, New York State is full of smart folks who have severely curtailed firearm owners rights...the same smart folks who let 9/11 happen. The same smart folks in the UK who have made it a criminals paradise by criminalizing citizens who seek to protect themselves.

If a monkey were appointed Judge would that make him smarter and better than you?

The subway is public transportation, which is the people's property. It was paid by for the citizens not the smart people.
 
No one is forced to buy handguns. Buyers should have to submit fingerprints, iris scans, DNA, as well as be subject to 24-hour police surveillance and strip searches.

After all, don't criminals kill far more people with handguns every year than [ideological, non-government-affiliated*] terrorists have caused in this country's history?

* to make clear that I'm not considering wars or crimes committed by citizens for reasons other than ideology.
 
Eghad said:
We can trade rights for a "feeling" of security or we can take our rights back and be a part of ensuring safety for our citizens. Instead of the idea that the government should be responsible for our safety.
Click to expand...
Big +1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top