Well, they got what they want...

[Steve Thompson]

--- Tyler Durden <camera_lumina at hotmail.com> wrote:

> ...I'm sure most are aware that random searches has begun here in NYC,
> at subway stations and in the LIRR. Contraband (drugs, etc...) can get
> the owner arrested. The next step, of course, will be to start grabbing
> anyone carrying terrorist propaganda, such as the Qu'ran, leaflets,
> or even the New York Times.

You fucking 'tard; nobody is going to be arrested for carrying a copy of
the NYT.

This deliberate abrogation of the right to be free of unreasonable search
and seizure is typical of the way authorities abuse process.  This sort of
thing happens _all the time_.  Here's how the scam works (for those of you
who require that their information comes pre-chewed):

J. Random Authority will decide that he or she wishes to advance the
incremental fait accompli of the tiered police state.  He or she examines
the political landscape of the moment and identifies a flimsy excuse that
may be used to backstop this-or-that draconian measure.  In this case,
random searches of transit passengers.  It is expected that the flagrant
violation of the law by the authorites for some contrived need will
eventually be examined in court by virtue of some citizen petition that is
made in a fit of outrage or pique.  Depending on the political reality of
the moment, the courts may be encouraged to rule in such a way as to force
the complainant through the expensive and time-consuming task of going in
front of the Supreme Court.  In the meantime, the authorities carry on
with their blatantly illegal activities and wait for the courts to rule
them in the wrong; if that actually occurs -- by no means a sure thing
when science, reason, and logic are habitually excluded from judicial
processes.

As a nice side effect, many actions of this sort are undertaken with the
secondary motive of outraging and provoking so-called undesireable
elements within the affected population.  

In North America, this is the business-as-usual model of government
interacting with its citizens.  And since every judicial ruling has a
small but finite chance of being ruled in the Government's favour, no
matter how absurd such a ruling might be, the tiered authoritarian and
plutocratic police state is thus incrimentally realized.

> The sad thing is that it is still absurdly easy to get whatever you
> want into the subways. For one, not every station has any kind of
> significant police presence (funny, but the Chambers street station
> this morning had multiple possible places where someone could enter
> with a backpack, despite the fact that it opens directly inside
> "Ground Zero" and the path Trains to New Jersey). But even if there
> were police everywhere, there are still many places between stations
> where someone determined could enter.

Not to mention the subtle, expensive, and time-consuming methods for
putting people and things in-place that tend to be favoured by the Usual
Suspects.
 
> OK, OK...so the police are deterrents against a few lone crazy
> copycats, who don't have enough sense to enter away from police
> line-of-site. But it sure seems damned silly to be giving up 
> constitutional protection for the sake of  an image of protection.

You got one thing right:  it's damned silly.


Regards,

Steve

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com