Skip to comments.NYers to NYPD: 'I Do Not Consent to Being Searched'
Posted on 07/22/2005 11:06:07 AM PDT by BigFinn
Reacting to the NYPD's announcement Thursday afternoon that police would randomlybut routinelysearch the bags of commuters, one concerned New Yorker quickly created a way for civil libertarians to make their views black-and-white. In a few outraged moments, local immigrant rights activist Tony Lu designed t-shirts bearing the text, "i do not consent to being searched." The minimalist protest-wear can be purchased here, in various styles and sizes. (Lu will not get a cut. The shirts' manufacture, sale, and shipment, will be handled by the online retailer. Lu encourages budget-conscious New Yorkers to make their own and wear them everywhere.)
Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly had announced the legally obviousthat New Yorkers are free to decline a search and "turn around and leave." But Lu, who is a lawyer at Urban Justice Center, warned that even well-intentioned cops could interpret people's natural nervousness or anger as "reasonable suspicion." The possibility of unjustified interrogation and even arrest is real, Lu said.
Although police promised they would not engage in racial profiling, Lu said that, as with all street-level policing, people of color and poor immigrants would be particularly vulnerable, especially if encounters lead to arrests.
Amen. This is especially stupid considering the fact that the cops won't be profiling or picking out suspiciously looking people and packages. They'll be doing just like at the airports--every 10th or 20th or nth person regardless of the absurdity. Useless placating.
I skedaddled out to Westchester to live 10 years ago.
Say no more, indeed!
How about we just do away with the Fourth Amendment everywhere?
Let the police just enter people's home and search for illegal MP3's. That'll stop illegal downloads. Maybe they'll also find a terrorist or two listening to a bootleg of Desert Rose.
Wonder what will happen when an "I Do Not Consent to Being Searched" tee-shirt meets up with a "Club Gitmo" tee-shirt?? Get ready to ))))R-U-M-B-L-E((((!!!!
If FDR had ever stood up in 1943 and called Nazism a "religion of peace," he would have been tossed into the Potomac River with his @ss chained to his freakin' wheelchair.
Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United S tates; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
So typical of nutty urban leftists to complain about a momentary inconvenience but also give nearly unanimous support to forced disarmament of law-abiding citizens.
In NYC its not, in Long Island, its a different story.
LI cops are paid very well.
You just keeping baah-baaahing away.
In case you didn't realize it, this a forum dedicated to smaller, less intrusive Govt. Ya know - like conservatism.
Indeed, what exactly are they protecting anymore? Our borders are wide open, our every move is scrutinized, the "freedom and liberty" thing is pretty much extinct on the entire globe at this point.
"Stop quoting the Bill of Rights you pinko commie!"
Sorry. : )
With all due respect, your comment is both ugly and stupid.
We probably agree a lot on free (unfair) trade, too.
Hey, I watch COPS.
They get to drive like mad, shoot guns, and beat people up. AND they get paid. How cool is that?
However, I believe that this type of search does not violate the Fifth Amendment. Here's why: The police are not stopping people on the street and randomly searching them. The city is saying that as a condition of riding the subway, you might be subject to a bag search. If someone doesn't consent to the search, they are free to do two things: leave their bag at home, or not ride the subway. That is not a violation of the Constitution.
Unfortunatly you have nailed a principle reason for not profiling. What is needed is for a change of fashion. Only tight fitting clothes (men and women) and no bags, or purses, unless small and transparant.
The other solution is to get lots of those low power xrays and scan everyone. (Shoot to kill when a bomb is discovered.) And fortet the so called privacy issue, people will be more modestly covered than in a doctor's office, and the scan will not take permanent photos. BTW, keep these scans secret and the location of the scanners secret. Deploy them with the troops as well as any crowded likely terrorist spot. The terrorists will start turning up dead and no one will know why.
Red Rover are you typing from russia or china??
Did we demand armed cops at all night clubs in the U.S. because of what happened in Bali?
Ramzi Yousef's "contact lens cleaner" bombs made it past airport security just fine.
Yeah, cuz terrorists are so easily discouraged. Anyway, what's to stop someone from exploding himself while he's waiting in line to be searched? Nothing.
Pardon me saying so, but you're one rude SOB. It's a good thing you went into the Marine Corps, because the Corps really need knuckleheads with swingin' d!cks to take beachheads and stuff that frankly I'm not tough enough to do. You've proven you're top-notch at taking orders without thinking. Good job, Marine.
Did you by chance hear they guy filling in for Rush Limbaugh today? Rodger Hedgecock (sp?) - I heard him ranting about law enforcement in this country and how they are all under trained and always want more money - I didn't hear his rationale. He was talking about the shooting in LA where the man used his 2 year old as a sheild and they were both killed, he was calling the police idiots and how they needed to take a lesson from the police in London because of how they handled the shooting today. Comparing apples and oranges but I was pretty ticked off listening to him.
When there is a suicide/homicide bombing (either packpack or vehicle) at a school/hospital/shopping mall/supermarket (ie. Lodi sleeper cell)...will you consent to mandatory searches/1 mile vehicle exclusion zones(you walk in)around all these places also?
I think you are wrong. If you can't ride the public subway, then maybe you can't use the public parks, or walk on the public sidewalk either. You are basically saying that it within the consitution to make one housebound if they don't agree to random searches, and I don't think it is.
No, doesn't work for me. My point here is more along the line with post #186... if the NYPD is not allowed to search everyone then they can't search the nervous ME youth with the long bulky coat. I live on an island here in Washington State and we are subject to random searches to ride the ferry. If we were not in this terrorism battle I would not like it one bit but as it is better safe than sorry.
And not I don't think the war on terror is just an excuse to take our rights away from us.
I prefer my version.
My thoughts entirely. I don't know why good American men and women are being killed overseas so Iraqis can be "free," yet anyone with bad intent could merrily waltz over the Quebec/Maine border while good American citizens consent to having their persons examined in order to get on a subway train.
Kinda makes one wonder how many of those denizens are paid to post their acquiescent views in order to assist in the manufacture of public consent.
Some of them may simply be scared dupes. But I suspect many are a fifth column for the globalists.
A sincere thank you for replying in the spirit of this debate.
IMO, that argument doesn't answer the randomness question.
See my post #49, and you'll see I'm not saying searches are a 5th Amendment violation. Only random searches.
I have been following your posts on this thread. As a product of 3 generations of NYPD, I must thank you for your defense of the rank and file of New York's finest.
"No, I'm sorry Lieutenant, I can't locate anything hidden in his pants."
Quote: Actually, they work really well for concealed carry.
I guess I could stomach them in cammo colors. Just not lime green or pink.
Look, I live in NYC, ride the subway and have no trouble at all with the searches.
You can spend your whole life saying, "this is what they can do. This is a weak spot..." or you can assume the cops and others are doing their best to keep these idiots from bombing us.
Too funny - I know cops do watch COPS - but it is usually so that they can critique what the cops on the show are doing wrong.
The next arguement will be that because it is a public road they should be able to search your vehicle or you cannot use it. Slippery slope and people here are eating it up.
LOL. Good one.
Have you never heard of reasonable articulable suspicion?
The guy was a fool.
Cops in London don't even carry guns, and the brits don't think most of their cops are qualified to handle firearms, only certain cops, with special training get firearms and its a very limited number.
Same here at Mariners' games. Be searched or go home.
The only "Constitutional" approach to this situation is to shut down the damn subway system and fill all those tunnels with concrete. This type of thing simply isn't conducive to a free society.
Been there, done that.
Compared to the cost of living? Cops here in Northern Va are paid well (not pretty well) comparatively but the cost of living here is so high that they usually can't live in the County where they work.
Yeah, that's what the "war on boredom" is for. (wtf is a "war on terror anyway, and how do you win it?).
No problem, and to your family.
Thank You for what they do and have done.
Fanny packs are usually worn by male bicyclists in spandex.
And I thought gays were supposed to be better dressed than straights!
Look, I live in NoVa, ride MetroRail, and would be mighty pissed if they tried that crap here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.