News & Politics - N.Y. Subway Riders Resigned to Searches

mh67511 · 07-22-2005, 10:42 AM

Quote:

N.Y. Subway Riders Resigned to Searches

By SAM DOLNICK, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 22 minutes ago

NEW YORK - Straphangers seemed resigned to random bag searches Friday as police across the region stepped up transit security in response to the new round of attacks in London.

"They should have done this long time ago, ever since 9/11," said stockbroker Ron Freeman, 25, who had his backpack searched Friday morning at a subway station in Brooklyn. "I don't mind if they're doing it for the right cause."

Random searches also are being conducted on buses, ferries and commuter railroads, and anyone who refuses a search won't be allowed to ride. Those caught carrying drugs or other contraband could be arrested.

Outside the Long Island Rail Road station in Brentwood, where the police presence had been beefed up, officers arrested a man Thursday evening they said had weapons in his van and a 1996 conviction for possessing a pipe bomb. His van had been stopped because he appeared suspicious, police said.

At the Lafayette Avenue subway station in Brooklyn, Greg Morgan, 30, was among those whose bag was searched Friday. "I don't know how effective it will be, but if it makes people feel more secure, it's OK."

Police stopped every fifth person with a bag entering the station. Each search took only a few seconds, and police appeared to be stopping people of all ages and races. In some cases, officers dumped the contents onto a table set up near the turnstiles, and in others they rifled through the bags.

Ten more officers and a bomb-sniffing dog were seen milling around the Brooklyn station.

"I thought it would never come to this," said William Reyes, 40, who was not searched.

"Surely, we do need it," Reyes added. "I don't like our privacy being invaded but given the circumstances around the globe, I understand it."

At a subway station in the Bronx, a police officer with a bullhorn informed commuters of the new policy, and a sign propped up on an easel read: "Backpacks, other containers subject to inspection."

It took police five minutes to go through Davon Campbell's bags. "It's important to search even when you have three bags," said Campbell, 24. "It doesn't bother me."

"Everyone's been very cooperative," said Officer Julio Seda, one of those doing the inspections. "Unfortunately, in the times we live in, it's a necessary evil."

New York's subways carry about 4.5 million passengers on the average weekday. The system, the largest in the country, has more than 450 stations, most of which have multiple entrances.

The inspection of bags and packages started on a small scale Thursday afternoon and was expanded during Friday morning's rush hour.

The New York Civil Liberties Union said the new measures violate basic rights and could invite racial or religious profiling.

"The plan is not workable and will not make New Yorkers more secure but will inconvenience them as police go about finding a needle in a haystack," NYCLU executive director Donna Lieberman said.

But Rajesh John, 34, who is of Indian heritage, said he did not object to being selected for a bag search at the Woodlawn subway station in the Bronx.

"No not at all. We agree with this," said John, who was heading to his job at an accounting firm in Manhattan. "It's necessary because of what happened in England."

Police said they had considered instituting bag searches for three years. The emerging pattern of attacks on transit targets in London forced their hand, said Paul Browne, the New York Police Department's chief spokesman.

Officials declined to specify where the checks would be conducted or how long they would last. The NYPD had already doubled the number of officers who patrol the subway after the initial attack in London on July 7, at a cost of $2 million a week in overtime.

"We just live in a world where, sadly, these kinds of security measures are necessary," said Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is known to ride the subways to work himself. "Are they intrusive? Yes, a little bit. But we are trying to find that right balance.

I think it's a good idea because you never know what people are carrying these days. I know it would make me feel a lot more secure and they already arrested one guy with weapons in his van. You can't fly on a plane without being searched. I think they'll just need to streamline it more to make it quicker and easier, since so many people ride public transit every day.

I don't think it violates basic rights eithher since you have every "right" to take a taxi or drive a car. If you want to take the trains or buses then you'll just have to leave a few minutes earlier and not bring any illegal items with you which you shouldn't be bringing anyways.

Lexis · 07-22-2005, 12:06 PM

I agree. As the article points out, the officers aren't using one paticular profile and maybe, these searches will bring down crime in other areas.

**TheAngel** · 07-23-2005, 05:56 PM

To be honest, I'm not object to these searches and never have been. I have nothing to hide and if it takes me five minutes or twenty minutes to get through a line and a handful of lives is saved in the process, than so be it, I'd happily spend an hour in that line. They aren't profiling, despite what the ACLU would have you believe, and random searches are better than no searches at all.

WalkingOnSunshine · 08-04-2005, 08:06 AM

It was only a matter of time..... ACLU of NY sues city over subway searches.

Drekkan · 08-04-2005, 09:55 AM

The only thing wrong with what the officers are doing is the lack of profiling. Terrorism, now, is a crime with a specific profile. The main facet of the profile is that the bombers are now exclusively Muslim men of Arab, Persian, or Central Asian decent. This happens to reflect a racial quality, however, it's still a valid police profile.

Profiles are there to help police make judgements and save lives. It may make us feel all touchy feely and nice inside to say "we're being totally blind to skin/religion" - but really we're saying "we're being complete and total idiots". It's not old ladies (nor even young white men) that are blowing themselves and others up. Once they do, then heck, treat them with equal suspicion. But as long as it's people who all have the same skin tone... maybe it's a good idea to give preference to searching them.

I'm sorry, but just searching blindly and randomly, and ignoring a huge common factor among the terrorists, well, that's just idiotic and a waste of manpower. In something so vital to national security that sort of behaviour is treasonable. The NYPD and the MTA should update their profile, and use it, or be relieved of their duty and replaced by someone who's more concerned with the safety of their citizens then appearing to be "compassionate", "tender" and "fair".

Bronson · 08-06-2005, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheAngel

To be honest, I'm not object to these searches and never have been. I have nothing to hide and if it takes me five minutes or twenty minutes to get through a line and a handful of lives is saved in the process, than so be it, I'd happily spend an hour in that line. They aren't profiling, despite what the ACLU would have you believe, and random searches are better than no searches at all.

I agree with you. If I have nothing to hide, then I shouldn't mind being searched. What is the ACLU's problem anyway? I could see if there was some overreaching that they opposed but they seem to want to tie the hands of those who want to keep us safe.


Fan Forum > General Discussion > News & Politics > N.Y. Subway Riders Resigned to Searches