I got searched in the Jersey City PATH station last night

[cap]

I am not a happy camper. For those of you not in the area, the PATH is a high speed light rail line. They set up a gate like air port security complete with the walkthrough archway and the luggage scanner. Scanning everyone's bag. My cell phone and ipod set off the alarm. Pulled me over and made me take off my coat and wanded me. I didn't say anything because I felt I would get arrested if I put up a fuss. A couple weeks ago, I saw a black man on his knees in front of the cops with his hands cuffed behind his back. Didnt want to end up like that. Wish I had a camera cell phone for that one.

[LiberalPartisan]

1. Just doing their job

If that's all you had to 'endure' you have no complaint. Were you harrassed, intimidated, singled out? It sounds like you're complaining because you were inconvenienced.

Why was the black man being detained? Was he being mistreated? Were his civil rights violated?

[DoYouEverWonder]

4. Then maybe you can explain

how this kind of bullshit makes us safer?

[magellan]

6. I'd like to hear the answer to that too. (nt)

[LiberalPartisan]

7. Would you prefer no security?

If not perhaps you can detail what is acceptable to you.

What the original poster described is a very reasonable level of security.

[DoYouEverWonder]

11. That's not an answer

I'll try again. How do random searches protect us from terrorist? Do you think Usama bin Forgotten rides the PATH train?

[LiberalPartisan]

20. It probably doesn't add to safety and security

At least not in any readily quantifiable manner.

My point is the original poster merely experienced a temporary inconvenience and the search of his person was entirely reasonable under common law, precedent and more importantly how the Fourth Amendment has been applied under various courts.

[DoYouEverWonder]

22. When I went to school

we were taught that this sort of thing only happened in Russia.

A free society means that you can move around in your own country without restriction.

It's a little more serious then a temporary inconvenience. It's a slippery slope. You're papers please. Seig heil.

[BiggJawn]

23. My wish for you...

..is that some day you experience the "temporary inconvenience" of a cavity search, but that'll be just A-OK with you because it's keeping you and the rest of the flock safe, right?

the Fourth Ammendment is being eroded like a sand castle in the surf, so your assertation that this is Just Jake under the Constitution is bullshit.

Ruminate on the words of a fellow by the name of Franklin who used to run a print shop in Philly: "People who would trade Essential Liberty for the Illusion of Safety deserve neither Liberty or Safety."

[donsu]

31. I would prefer security like it used to be - cops didn't check your bags

on the train.

what the cops are doing now isn't security it's harrassment

I'd rather have no security and the cops called if needed.

I don't want cameras on every street corner.

our terror fear has been manufactured - it is a produced product.

the bushmilhousegang did 9/11

[Steve A Play]

33. There was nothing wrong with the PA Transit Police that rode those trains

for years. In fact I believe they're still there, riding the trains, walking the platforms, and patrolling the stations. You attempt to portray this as an "either / or" situation. Either they set up invasive security, searching everyone and everything coming and going, or there's "no security" at all. Privacy and security are not mutually exclusive of one another.

If I'm not mistaken they've installed cell phone extender antennas in the Path tubes between NY and NJ so people can use their phones on the trains. That makes anyone with a set of eyes and a cell phone a potential part of a volunteer civilian security force. If you see something or someone suspicious, all you need to do is dial 911 and report it. The police can simply meet the train at the next station.

Just because you are willing to sacrifice your right to privacy and are willing to endure unreasonable restrictions on your right to travel freely, in exchange for the 'perception' that it makes you more secure, doesn't mean that the rest of us are willing to agree to that. What's next? Do we start searching every car or truck that uses a major bridge, tunnel, or thoroughfare because it might contain a bomb? Search every person trying to walk down a major street or to enter a building or mall because they might be a terrorist? Is that what you really want?

Let me point out one thing. The police have no legal responsibility to protect you. NONE! You can not sue the police for failing to protect you if something bad happens to you. If you call them and they don't respond, and you are harmed as a result, there's nothing you can do about it. The courts have said so time and time again. You get to pay them to be there to give you that ticket when you screw up, but you get no guarantee that they'll be there when you need or want them to be. There is no way I will willingly give up any of my rights to them when the courts say that I'm not guaranteed to be protected should I surrender them.

I don't want to pay taxes only to have them use my own money to pay for impinging on my rights while they inconvenience myself and my family, friends, and neighbors, to little or no effect. In my experience over the last 50 years, none of the people I've ever met, or even crossed paths with, have ever been terrorists, and the chances overwhelmingly are that none of them are actually going to become one in the near future. I'd rather they use my tax money to hire more armed police to patrol all of the unprotected air vents, unlocked tunnel emergency exits, and un patrolled miles of open tracks, that a terrorist would more than likely use to stage a "terror" attack without being noticed.

But that's just me. :)

Steven P. :kick:

[Don Claybrook]

5. and this is how the 4'th Amendment goes away

one little piece at a time, with people such as yourself championing its demise, cheering on the emergence of the police state.

You probably have cause to be happy; it looks like your point of view will hold sway in this country, and mine will be considered radical and dangerous. But I'll take my chances and continue supporting the Bill of Rights.

[LiberalPartisan]

8. Do you ever travel by airplane?

This is no different nor is it unreasonable search and seizure - it is quite reasonable.

[Don Claybrook]

Of course I travel by plane

and yeah, it's a great deal different. I've never heard of a train being hijacked and flown into a building. The train can either go this way, or it can go that way--2 directions in 2 dimensions. That presents a pretty limited risk.

I refuse to live in fear, but it irks me to be subject to the bad policy brought about by the fear the administration has successfully instilled in much of the populace. Clearly, we disagree on what constitutes unreasonable search and seizure.

[NJCher]

14. No, I quit flying because of this kind of crap

Also, a few months ago, WNYC, our public radio station, had a show on this topic of searches at the train stations. One of the guests had studies that showed this is a very ineffective way to conduct security.

In addition, there were comments from the police that there were no abuses. The callers showed that to be a lie, however, as they reported abuses.

The man on his knees brings up images of Abu Graib. That's what they want for all of us.




Cher

[titoresque]

26. It is not "reasonable"

Random searches...reasonable?! So search 1 out of every ten people (or whatever the percentage is) Violate 1 out of ten people...this is ok with you? So the guy who's being searched to create the illusion and intimidation that is called THE BUSH REGIME is searched and sent on his merry way while 9 other people walk thru possibly strapped with bombs?

Please make no mistake I am certainly not making reccomendation that every single person be searched. But please don't argue that random searches are for our protection and merely only an inconvenience.
You're allowed 4 or 5 books of matches and two lighters on a plane......NOT 3 LIGHTERS! NOT 6 BOOKS OF MATCHES......that would be far too dangerous! Give me a break!

It's all smoke and mirrors and bullies on the playground.......and people like you willing to roll over!

[LiberalPartisan]

28. We're not talking about random searches

The original poster's electronic equipment set off security alarms giving the police the probable cause required to perform a more thorough search. As described by the OP the entire episode was completely legal and has been for decades.

[Catrina]

32. What should we do about the tens of thousands of Americans

actually, a hundreds of thousands, who have been murdered or died in road accidents since 2001? If the well-being of Americans is what this is about, why is there zero concern about the threat to their safety each and every day by other Americans?

I refuse to live in fear also, because if I did, I would be far more afraid of driving or going out in a big city late at night, than riding on a train ~ try to be logical ~

You cannot ever have a guarantee of safety ~ to think that giving up rights to protect you from only one form of threat (pretty low on the scale of threats we face each day) demonstrates how propaganda works to cause otherwise normally intelligent people to lose all sense of perspective and support fascist policies which are both demeaning, controlling and totally ineffective.

Let's go look for Osama Bin Laden ~ fear-mongering here has done nothing to capture the man we are told was responsible for 9/11, now being used as an excuse to totally subjugate what used to be a free society. Osama's mission accomplished, if we're to believe George Bush's inane claims that they 'hate us for our freedoms'. Well, they need hate us no more ~ we are doing their job for them ~ if we are to believe the fear-mongers.

Life is short and everyone dies in the end, some sooner than others. While I'm here, I will not trade freedom for so-called safety (it's a bad trade-off as history has demonstrated). I prefer to be responsible for my own safety. The government could give a damn about my safety and to think they do care, is actually funny to be honest ~ particularly this government ~

[dogday]

18. You give them an inch, they will take the mile nt

[MadHound]

9. Amazing how many people are willing to give up their civil rights

All in the vain pursuit of a little "security".

Sorry but this is just wrong. All this searching does is intimidate and harass people. It prevents nothing and enables the continuing encroachment of the police state. But hey, I suppose this is just fine with some folks:eyes: Pathetic, just pathetic.

[Rene]

15. Very well stated. I completely agree.

We went thru 40 years of Cold War and NEVER had this police state/fear mentality within our borders.
We MUST stop this administration's march to eliminate our freedoms to move whereever we want to in this country without this harassment

[bobbieinok]

34. and there were also 5th columnists and Nazi agents in US then BUT

'now is so much worse soooooo we have to increase security so much more'

the 'war on terra' is MORE DANGEROUS than WWII??????????????

[cap]

24. you arent getting into an airplane every single morning

I am riding that train every day.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. Gee how many terra-ists have they found in the PATH stations?

What a waste of money and time. And it had to be humiliating.

[baldguy]

12. Instilling fear in the public does not enhance security.

If they have no reason to suspect you're doing something wrong, then any search is unreasonable.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gormy Cuss]

17. And their job is busy work

pretending to be security. It's no different that the shoe-removal dance at airports. These are dog and pony shows to assure the public that we're serious about security these days.

[seabeyond]

21. yes i have been intimidated. or the intent was there

going thru airport, singled out, and wanded. the woman asked how i was. i said this is a bunch of crap. she held me. a cop came over stood next to me and a man came over and stood an inch from my face. said nothing just stood there. until finally i asked what was up. he says i hear you have a problem. i say this is crap. we stand there. until i finally say, .... are you done with me. the whole purpose of that little exercise was to intimidate me. a 42 yr old mother with two kids and husband off to florida for a week vacation. then they proceeded to work on intimidating my kids putting them behind a table to go thru their back pack of toys and books, 5 and 7. when asked why the cop was standing there also, the cop told us all she was protecting security person from ...... ME.

in the whole history of aviation never has a 42 year old woman with her whole family on the plane, taken a plane down with a bomb. to give me, but the possibility is there,..... is bullshit.

this is a bunch of crap. i personally have always felt that if i am law abiding i DO have personal right to not be treated as criminal. i find it offensive to stand in public and hold arms out to be frisked, to see if i have weapons ..... treated like a criminal

it kept no one safe

it was purely because they didnt like my attitude. cause i dared to to say something

it IS a bunch of CRAP

[LibDemAlways]

27. I've described an almost identical scenario and

had a bunch of replies telling me I should be glad I was harrassed because "security" is important. What I witnessed in Seattle a couple of summers ago while I had my arms outstreched was beyond the pale. An old woman, had to be 90 - frail and hunched over in her wheelchair - was pulled aside. TSA screeners pulled her shoes off, and hoisted her out of the chair so she and it could be wanded. She looked frightened and confused. Her daughter, herself a senior, tried to protest, and she was pulled aside too and given the full on bra feel up treatment.

I described this to a couple of women I don't know very well and one of them said, "Well, it should have made you feel safer. That old lady could have been a terrorist in disguise. And how did they know you weren't a terrorist, too?"

The US government has succeeded in making the public think that they have to be protected from the threat from grandma and suburban housewives, as well as small children. Gee, I sure feel safer - not.

[seabeyond]

30. reasoned is gone. people dont understand the importance of these

stories. this happened 6 months after 9/11. i was in local airport (local employees, amarillians) at 6:30 in the morning. an empty airport at that. to put the fear of god into children, does not comfort this mother. children who are already scared wit the simple experience of getting on a plane. to see a mother arms stretched out...... like a criminal does not comfort me. i grew up in the time that male, my father, brothers, husband father in law all felt an obligation adn responsibility to protect female, me..... that is in essence who they have been for a lifetime. yet....... they failed. they tucked their dick in. and i the female stood to the mans intimidation.

(i wouldnt have wanted any to interfer. was quite capable of handling. one of the issues is i didnt realize this man was there in my face to intimidate. i dont receive intimidation. didnt dawn on me, until i moved past the man and saw my kids behind the table)

i knew then where we were going as a society. pisses me off now to walk in an airport and these very people that said i should feel comforted are now making me leave the country,....... via airport, lol. i have to go to akumal in mexico in two weeks. i have told all my people, .... years later,...... must i lower my eyes now. will i have a gun drawn, and aimed if my eyes are not lowered. we know...... they will shoot, and ask questions later. if i dont recognize i am suppose to be intimidated??????????

btw the man that was shot dead....... we were also told to feel comfort in that mans death that they are thinking about our safety. i find that totally off the wall

[meegbear]

2. My cell phone and ipod set off the alarm ....

and your point caller?

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Pavonia Avenue or Grove Street?

That sucks. I heard that only Exchange Place was going to get the Soviet Treatment.

[bahrbearian]

13. people who are willing to give up freedom for the sake

of short-term security deserve neither.

[abluelady]

19. Next Time It Happens

Remind the "security" man that Mr. Bush isn't worried about security anymore so you need not be scanned! The war on terra is over.

[cap]

25. the funny thing is that most of us in the NYC area

are willing to endure more risk rather than surrender our civil liberties. It is everyone living in Podunk who are making these rules for us. Our civil liberties are worth dying for. We are on the front lines of the war on terror as much as any soldier. The Republicans are not listening to us and our needs/wants and desires in this area.

All this inconvenience and deprivation of liberty is something we, the victims, do not want. Everyone is fed up with this nonsense.

[foreverdem]

35. I hear ya, cap

I've already had my bag searched on four separate occassions before getting on the subway, and let me tell you, I hated the feeling it gave me. I felt violated in a way, I can't really describe it. And it doesn't solve a thing, for every person they stop, there are 100 plus more that get on the trains without being searched, so I certainly don't feel any more secure.

[grasswire]

29. did they check your ID?

It would be interesting to know if they are running IDs against some kind of database. I've been wondering when buses and trains will get locked down. The freaking Greyhound bus stations are wanding and searching all passengers. When dissent is criminalized and movement is restricted to "approved" citizens, a cat and mouse game will ensue.