FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Random Searches in New York’s Subway

by DAVID ANDERSON

Perhaps the greatest outrage about the new New York City government’s policy of random bag searches in the subway is the lack of outrage about it. Where are the stories about people turning around and not being searched, interviews with opponents of the policy, or even an in depth discussion of the legalities of it?

The way it has been sold to the public by almost the entire media in New York is “is it popular”, as if general acceptance is justification for a policy which goes further legally than any other in recent times. Anecdotally, the media would have us believe it is a very popular move, something that knowing New Yorkers, and being one, I find hard to believe.

Regardless, popularity is surely not the issue here. If it were put to the popular vote, there are some states where the deportation of Arab-Americans would no doubt win local elections. We have a Supreme Court, or rather will probably soon say, we HAD a Supreme Court one of whose primary functions is to preserve the rights of the individual. If it weren’t for those “Activist Judges” it is quite possible schools STILL wouldn’t be integrated, there would be no freedom of choice when it comes to reproduction, and almost certainly religion and state would have become terribly mixed. But we have hardly heard a word from judges, or the ACLU, last bastion of personal rights in America, about the random searches of the effects of innocent commuters.

The only real discussion has been the specter of racial profiling, thus taking the argument away from “Should we be doing this at all?” to “How best do we do this?”

Not only is the policy invasive of our rights, it is totally ineffective and probably counter-productive. Suicide bombers are almost by definition fanatics whose whole life’s meaning has become this one act, something they’ve trained for, thought about, risked all for, possibly traveled vast distances to accomplish, and forsaken even life itself for. Are a few bored cops at a minority of subway stations and busses really going to prevent them from going about their horrible missions? Even in the BEST case scenario it will only lead to immediate detonation at the search point, an act which could kill more people than a detonation in a subway car itself. Indeed, in the “bring it on” ideal our president is famous for, aren’t these searches basically daring the bombers to strike and thus humiliate our feeble efforts?

We hear comparisons between this policy and airport searches. For a start, catching planes is optional, for most New Yorkers, catching public transport isn’t. Are we to risk being fired for tardiness because we turned around and didn’t want out possessions riffled through by the government?

Secondly, airport searches are fairly effective, they provide a real barrier to taking explosives and metal weapons onto planes. And finally courts have held that magnetometers and metal detectors are not “searches”. By any standard, a policeman poking through your handbag or back pack is a search’.

And again we hear that famous cliché, the one President Bush can’t go on TV without saying – it “Sends a message.” The message senders, these same people who oppose a vaccine for Human Papiloma Virus, morning after contraception, needle exchanges, and even condoms, love this policy. The whole over-worn (count how many times a day you hear it) “Send a message” cliché is usually employed as a veiled threat or justification for all manner of stupidities, from invading Iraq, to wellsubway searches. When you hear it, as well as that old chestnut “In this post 9/11 world”, you just know something terribly stupid or some horrible policy is about to be announced. A policy like random bag searches.

The final horror here is that there’s nothing to suggest this is the government’s last demand. Freedom is usually destroyed in a gradual manner, it is less noticeable then. It is a short step from random subway bag searches, to random street searches, from making it optional to making it compulsory, from not asking for ID, to demanding it. And this latest policy has been put in place without even any terrorist actions against the United States! Imagine how few rights we’ll have left when something does happen here?

What freedom do we have when the government can do exactly what it wishes because it has manufactured a climate of fear like this administration has, and what freedom do we deserve when we as a society and as individuals just lie down and take it?

DAVID ANDERSON is a criminal defense attorney in New York City. He can be reached at: DocInNy@yahoo.com

 

David Anderson has a B.A. (Hon.) in Middle East politics from Melbourne University and did post graduate work at Georgetown University. He grew up in Australia and is a retired attorney in New York City.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
April 28, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Slandering Populism: a Chilling Media Habit
Andrew Levine
Why I Fear and Loathe Trump Even More Now Than On Election Day
Jeffrey St. Clair
Mountain of Tears: the Vanishing Glaciers of the Pacific Northwest
Philippe Marlière
The Neoliberal or the Fascist? What Should French Progressives Do?
Conn Hallinan
America’s New Nuclear Missile Endangers the World
Peter Linebaugh
Omnia Sunt Communia: May Day 2017
Vijay Prashad
Reckless in the White House
Brian Cloughley
Who Benefits From Prolonged Warfare?
Kathy Kelly
The Shame of Killing Innocent People
Ron Jacobs
Hate Speech as Free Speech: How Does That Work, Exactly?
Andre Vltchek
Middle Eastern Surgeon Speaks About “Ecology of War”
Matt Rubenstein
Which Witch Hunt? Liberal Disanalogies
Sami Awad - Yoav Litvin - Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb
Never Give Up: Nonviolent Civilian Resistance, Healing and Active Hope in the Holyland
Pete Dolack
Tribunal Finds Monsanto an Abuser of Human Rights and Environment
Christopher Ketcham
The Coyote Hunt
Mike Whitney
Putin’s New World Order
Ramzy Baroud
Palestinian, Jewish Voices Must Jointly Challenge Israel’s Past
Ralph Nader
Trump’s 100 Days of Rage and Rapacity
Harvey Wasserman
Marine Le Pen Is a Fascist—Not a ‘Right-Wing Populist,’ Which Is a Contradiction in Terms
William Hawes
World War Whatever
John Stanton
War With North Korea: No Joke
Jim Goodman
NAFTA Needs to be Replaced, Not Renegotiated
Murray Dobbin
What is the Antidote to Trumpism?
Louis Proyect
Left Power in an Age of Capitalist Decay
Medea Benjamin
Women Beware: Saudi Arabia Charged with Shaping Global Standards for Women’s Equality
Rev. William Alberts
Selling Spiritual Care
Peter Lee
Invasion of the Pretty People, Kamala Harris Edition
Cal Winslow
A Special Obscenity: “Guernica” Today
Binoy Kampmark
Turkey’s Kurdish Agenda
Guillermo R. Gil
The Senator Visits Río Piedras
Jeff Mackler
Mumia Abu-Jamal Fights for a New Trial and Freedom 
Cesar Chelala
The Responsibility of Rich Countries in Yemen’s Crisis
Leslie Watson Malachi
Women’s Health is on the Chopping Block, Again
Basav Sen
The Coal Industry is a Job Killer
Judith Bello
Rojava, a Popular Imperial Project
Robert Koehler
A Public Plan for Peace
Sam Pizzigati
The Insider Who Blew the Whistle on Corporate Greed
Nyla Ali Khan
There Has to be a Way Out of the Labyrinth
Michael J. Sainato
Trump Scales Back Antiquities Act, Which Helped to Create National Parks
Stu Harrison
Under Duterte, Filipino Youth Struggle for Real Change
Martin Billheimer
Balm for Goat’s Milk
Stephen Martin
Spooky Cookies and Algorithmic Steps Dystopian
Michael Doliner
Thank You Note
Charles R. Larson
Review: Gregor Hens’ “Nicotine”
David Yearsley
Handel’s Executioner
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail