Skip to comments.
Washington subway police to begin random bag checks
Reuters ^
| December 16, 2010
| Jeremy Pelofsky
Posted on 12/16/2010 1:40:00 PM PST by ConjunctionJunction
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
To: ConjunctionJunction
“May I see your Warrant officer?”
2
posted on
12/16/2010 1:41:33 PM PST
by
Lurker
(The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
To: ConjunctionJunction
Not long before they use Porn Scanners at school entrances.
3
posted on
12/16/2010 1:43:01 PM PST
by
GeronL
(#7 top poster at CC, friend to all, nicest guy ever, +96/-14, ignored by 1 sockpuppet.. oh & BANNED)
To: ConjunctionJunction
Better check those pink Dora bags for suspicious snack-like substances.
Good to know these brave heroes are protecting us.
4
posted on
12/16/2010 1:44:15 PM PST
by
Soothesayer
(smallpox is not a person)
To: Lurker
Expect a reply, “Your papers, please.”
To: ConjunctionJunction
I feel less safe already.
6
posted on
12/16/2010 1:45:06 PM PST
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(DEFCON I ALERT: The federal cancer has metastasized. All personnel report to their battle stations.)
To: ConjunctionJunction
Instead of TSA and bag checks why not just close the borders?
7
posted on
12/16/2010 1:45:22 PM PST
by
Beowulf9
To: ConjunctionJunction
Bush played offense. Obama plays defense.
A huge difference.
8
posted on
12/16/2010 1:46:04 PM PST
by
what's up
To: ConjunctionJunction
To: ConjunctionJunction
The lack of a willingness to profile causes them to resort to random searches. Random searches will cause more people to choose to drive instead. More people driving cars will cause Global Warming. Therefore, not profiling is causing Global Warming. Get the word out to your liberal friends!
To: Beowulf9
Instead of TSA and bag checks why not just close the borders? Because the aim isn't to be effective. It's to crap on Americans.
11
posted on
12/16/2010 1:49:46 PM PST
by
SIDENET
("If that's your best, your best won't do." -Dee Snider)
To: Lurker
Exactly the right question.
12
posted on
12/16/2010 1:50:06 PM PST
by
King_Corey
(www.kingcorey.com)
To: Lurker
Oh, warrants are soooo passe.
You must be one of those crazy, tea-partier people or something.
/leftist
13
posted on
12/16/2010 1:51:14 PM PST
by
SIDENET
("If that's your best, your best won't do." -Dee Snider)
To: ConjunctionJunction
That’ll work okay until the first time they search a Muslim-then there’ll be hell to pay.
14
posted on
12/16/2010 1:54:33 PM PST
by
Spok
(Clueless, classless, clown...Obama.)
To: Spok
Nah, they’ll just exempt the Muslims. Or have them “search” themselves.
/sarc
To: ConjunctionJunction
Another installment on the price we pay for having Muzlims in our country.
16
posted on
12/16/2010 2:00:28 PM PST
by
La Lydia
To: ConjunctionJunction
You mean they are going to subvert the constitution once more and conduct searches without warrants?
17
posted on
12/16/2010 2:00:28 PM PST
by
calex59
To: ConjunctionJunction
looks as if members of the bar will have a decade of full-employment filing Fourth Amendment cases
To: ConjunctionJunction
Irish grandmas better leave their weed and firearms at home, or wear burkas. Muslims are exempt.
19
posted on
12/16/2010 2:05:50 PM PST
by
pallis
To: Lurker
>>May I see your Warrant officer?<<
Precisely. Until we are under Martial law, this is totally and utterly unconstitutional.
20
posted on
12/16/2010 2:06:24 PM PST
by
RobRoy
(The US Today: Revelation 18:4)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson