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.
Then they're not real cops if they cannot defend their people.
You don't believe terrorists are already here?
I'm beginning to despise the way I look at people I see out and about.
I've made the case that professional police forces only came into existence because of the large-scale immigration (of European peasants, mostly Irish) and internal migration (of freed slaves) to cities in the Northeast. The governing classes of these cities simply decided that disorder and chaos would rule the day if the Second Amendment was applied to these people. It's no coincidence that police departments came into existence right around the same time that the first gun control laws were passed.
Then you die.
Um, no, Rambo.
You go the entrance on the opposite side of the street and board the train.
You're dead on, Superior. During time of war, racial profiling is minimal intrusion. The true patriot will see it as absolutely necessary for survival. When 75 year old women engage in terrorist activities, search them. Until then some sense would be welcome.
Yes, but this thread isn't about the IRS.
Of course, the Tenth Amendment would also seem to indicate that Federal funds should not be used for the NYC subway system -- but that's a whole other issue!
Good grief, I know that.
They hate us because we didn't follow President Washington's advice to avoid foreign entanglements.
And so we've become mixed-up in Mideast politics and its terrorism.
Thanks, I needed that!
Now, where's that spare keyboard...
Well, hey...that's what a constitutional republic is all about. We can each be morons in our own way here on the forum, and our right to do that is protected under law.
Oh, wait...that's true until our exercise of free speech is considered a threat to security. Then, I suppose, if you choose to post, you will cooperate with the federal monitors.
Can and allowed are 2 different things.
The politicians are going to be all over the cops because of this policy, its like me asking you do your job, with one hand tied behind your back and me bad mouthing you or persecuting you when I do something that makes your job more difficult.
Because by definition, a random search is a fishing expedition.
And Nixon's advice to avoid becoming dependent on foreign oil.
What would be unreasonable about doing door to door searches to make sure you don't have drugs, kiddie porn, or weapons designed to hurt someone?
It's just plain common sense.
Well, nyah, nyah to you too!
Your posts have been in support of this stupid t-shirt, intended to show defiance of the police. All I can imagine is a bunch of Village Lefties, wearing this shirt, screaming at police in the subways. And it mightily pi$$e$ me off.
"meaning it cannot be reasoned that they will detect bombers by random searches."
If you profile, you increase the chances of finding someone with a bomb under their coat by a thousand fold. Once found with a bomb one, can easly reason that profiling and searches worked.
>As a New Yorker, I consent to anything that will make me safer
So do I.
>>Of course, you do realize there's nothing in this scheme that actually will make you safer, right?
Wrong. Profiling and searches will help find would-be bombers. Once found it avoids the calamity it would have caused if the bomb exploded. Profiling and targeted searches work.
Hello! The people who set the bombs of in London, lived in London.
is the airport security check-in, conducted by a government agency, a violation of the 4th amendment? the other poster is consistent at least - he says it is. what say you?
You apparently didn't read what I wrote. It is the RANDOM searches that are the problem.
Either search EVERYBODY or search all those who fit the profile/description. See my post #49.
What is all this "defiance of the police" nonesense?
The police are people like you and me. Okay, I won't try to find the link to the study that showed that it is one of the lowest IQ'ed professions (somewhere below garbagemen) ... because I don't know how scientific that study was, but the fact remains that if we weren't systematically try to disarm every american, and if we shut off the borders ... the populace would be the "militia" as it was intended to be, and we wouldn't need to be calling the cops nearly as often as we do.
Cops aren't altruistic by default. Some of them are good, some of them are bad ... just like in any profession. Lets get a little bit of perspective here and quit acting like these guys deserve every fiber of out being. The government has constructed us to need the police, it is not something that most people truly want. You can't own a gun in NYC. If you could, dare I say a "terrorist" on a subway would face one heck of a time obtaining their goal.
Here are some suggestions that you might find to be fun:
Do a websearch for "Sullivan Laws" and "swarthy immigrants", as I believe that the law (or editorials of that time advocating its passage) used that phrase.
Check out Clayton Cramer's "The Racist Roots of Gun Control" if you haven't already. claytoncramer.org
H.L. Mencken wrote an essay around this time as well.
Do a websearch on Mencken and "gun control".
If you click on my name and go to LINKS, you'll find a lot of RKBA research listed.
Yes, but the overwhelming majority of the Muslim terrorists are Arab. Arabs are white, but not many are blue-eyed blonds. You can rule out black Muslims, because violent Muslims do not recognize black Muslims as true Muslims. Most of your terrorists will look like the run of the mill Arab. The big terrorist groups are very racist and only like to recruit people of certain races.
Also, the vast majority of bomb toting terrorists are 20-40 year old males. Very, very few are women. And almost none are older men. The young men are encouraged to fight, hence the 72 virgin nonsense and other such sexually related propaganda geared toward the young and dumb male. Also, the violence-driven extremist Islamic culture is a male dominated arena in which the male is king and women are dogs. And so, the male is the primary champion of this cause.
Let me suggest to you that 9-11 may have been prevented had racial profiling been invoked. There is a lot more involved in this than simply passing off every effort to secure our safety than to get overly-consumed with racism, which is not even close to the final objective of 99.99% of our enforcement officers.
Political correctness makes a man crazy.
No, those are just excuses made by their apologists.
They'd hate us whether we had foreign entanglements or not.
Their mission is to conquer the entire world and convert those who will do so, and slay those who won't.
Hello! Well, perhaps they SHOULDN'T HAVE!!! (are you beginning to see the theme here?)
And we fled that country because they infringed on our right to bear arms. Which has left them wide open to all kinds of crap since.
And now in NYC you can't bear arms either .... DOH!!!!!!!!!!
How on earth did that happen?
not everyone goes through the same screening at the sirport either. so what you are saying is that we should stop the "pull aside" checks at the airport then, since just a few people go through it. its either everyone, or no one.
Good point. I think that is part of the reason, but it would appear to me to be mostly about us not being muslims. Note that every place in the world where you have any sizable muslim population, you find terrorism. What foreign entanglements led to terrorism in the Philipines, or Indonesia? I'm not trying to pick a fight, just trying to clarify. I agree that we are a target because our governement thinks we should be the policeman of the world, but the larger reason behind it IMO is that islam itself is varelse, which is the best way I've seen to describe it.
See This page and this page for a good description of the term, "varelse". Some times existing language isn't adequite to the task of describing things, at such times, new words are invented to handle the task.
I agree with you on those points. However, this terrorism thing is new to America. We had no reason to profile anyone like that. Israel sure does. Somehow they know the difference between some that looks Arab and someone that is. Weird but that's El Al who has never had a hijacking I hear.
Move to Texas!! Can't search us here, we all have guns and not a lot of public transport. I don't think we would let anyone take our guns. There was a big stink when they made it illegal a few years ago to have an open can of beer in the front seat. :)
"I'm beginning to despise the way I look at people I see out and about."
You should not despise yourself. You're doing the right thing by profiling people you meet on a daily basis. It's a first line of defense and it could be the difference between life and death. Now, if you don't live in the inner slums of America and stay home most of the time, I can understand your guilt. But, really you should not hate yourself, only the enemy.
on civil matters, it exists everywhere. there are no police officers losing their homes and private assets in civil suits brought by citizens for "line of duty" incidents. the municipality pays when such a verdict is given.
I'm stunned by the way so many on this thread just wholeheartedly throw their arms around an announcement like this and declare as idiots anyone who dares to express concern.
I'm VERY pro-law-enforcement, VERY anti-terrorist, and a 100% conservative. BUT, there's a reason why some protections are built into the constitution, and respecting those elements of the constitution does not automatically make one a "moonbat." Granted, the people behind these t-shirts probably ARE moonbats, but not because they see a problem with this.
It is the very height of naivete to automatically assume that ALL policemen are honorable, or that ALL members of ANY authority-group are honorable. This is EXACTLY why these protections are built into the constitution. It's called FREEDOM. The very notion that "if you got nothing to hide, you shouldn't have a problem with it" is entirely antithetical to the U.S. constitution, and it's a bizarre thing to see trumpeted on a board that so prides itself on allegiance to that document.
Finally, there's the reality that the odds of stopping anything via random searches are so miniscule as to be statistically non-existent. It's a knee-jerk move that will do nothing except cause trouble and clog up the arteries of public transportation.
So do I.
Never leave your house. That will make you safer. I suppose you've seen the last of the sun. On the bright side, think of all the money you will save on clothing.
Oh, and wear full football gear indoors. People have been known to slip while indide.
Since you'll consent to ANYTHING to make yourself "safer", I can give you about 1,000 more instructions. Would you like me to post them, or freepmail them.
Well, if this is actually true than good. But don't you think these officers are being told to avoid the arabs, because this would be racial profiling? I hope this profiling is not like what we see in our airports.
Right you are, Sonny M.
Oftentimes, if not most of the times, the politicians are the ones who impede police officers from enforcing the laws.
Thanks for reminding me.
Sorry, I refuse to move to the state that spawned Destiny's Child.
So one would think, at least until the black robes get hold of a definition. In recent years, the supreme court has ruled that police roadblocks where they randomly check for drugs or sobriety are "legal" precisely because they are random. I can't recall the cases offhand, but I recall them saying that such searches would not have been legal if they'd searched every single car or driver.
The courts in this country live in a weird, make-believe world.
"Because by definition, a random search is a fishing expedition."
Not if you profile and do target searches of the foe.
Sadly, yes, it is.
Spawned is the right word. It's a big state - you can't watch everyone.
target = targeted
Well then it's not a random search, is it?
Nowadays, non-juried courts are wrong more often than they are right.
Now excuse me while I declare eminent domain on your toolshed.
No kidding. I'm not in total agreement with Israel's treatment of Arabs either. But it's common sense to narrow the field down to the most likely suspects and let the most unlikely alone. I do think most of our problems are with our borders. If we could solve them there, the rest of the nation could be in peace.
"You apparently didn't read what I wrote. It is the RANDOM searches that are the problem."
Oh, I read it very carefully before responding. That is why I did not mention random searches, but rather "targeted" searches and profiling.
But I do agree with you that RANDOM searches should not be made - only targeted searches with the aid of profiling.
Here in D.C., the Metro actually closes down to the public for a few hours each night, so it's not totally apt. In New York the subways are 24 hours so it's probably more analagous there.
Even public roads are pretty much fair game now, as many courts have established the legality of random DWI checkpoint stops. Sadly, it's proabably just a matter of time until it gets extended the rest of the way to the public sidewalks as well.
That's amazing. It sure looked like you were disagreeing with me at first, but now it seems we're in agreement.
Just for the sake of argument, I'll accept that you may be as inane as that question suggests.
1) The islamotrash are here.
2) A portion of their support network is here as well.
They are allowed to remain here, and move about freely, because their presence provides an excuse (there's that word again) for those who seek to restrict the rights and freedoms of all Americans.
Ideological profiling, internment and deportation would eliminate the need for restrictions on society as a whole.
The islamotrash, as a group, are simply low level operatives who don't even realize how or why they're being used.