helix,

I bet if Democrats controlled the presidency and congress, and ID checks were used on Boston trains, that most complaining farkers wouldn't be complaining.

I sure as hell would be complaining.

Probably 90% of the security measures implemented since Sept. 11th have done virtually nothing in the way of providing protection from terrorists.

What they have done however is:

1)Show the world that we're scared.

2)Make it just that much easier for people in positions of authority to fark with people that, for whatever reason, rub them the wrong way.

"To be questioned to see ID when you have not done anything is completely wrong. I for one will never produce my ID unless I have done something wrong. There is no reason to ask people randomly to show who they are. Under this Country we are afforded the right of unlawful search and seizure. By asking for ID that right is being infringed on"

nightronin-Good Stuff

aureliawestlake, I'm just waiting for Halliburton to start mass producing Cyclon B prussic acid gas while the Arabs, Muslims and anti-war protesters are silently rounded up and shipped off to Gitmo. Oh wait, the latter has already happened. :(

As for you, captain_napalm: ah, so typically a WASP hetero male response. ;P Ever thought of joining the John Birch Society or Posse Comitatus? ;) All jokes aside, you really have no way of knowing what racial profiling really is unless you've experienced it first hand, and due to the colour of your skin, I suspect that you're not likely to experience it any time soon. Aside from which, racial profiling doesn't work, as there have been non-Arab Al Qaeda sympathizers who converted to Islam. So to stop every person who looks remotely Middle Eastern on suspicion of terrorist ties (when most of them are not terrorists, they're American citizens and patriots) while letting some white guy go because he doesn't fit the profile, and finding out later that the white guy who looked all-American was in fact leaking info to Al Qaeda about troop strength and movements, means that all that time, energy, manpower and resources wasted on scrutinizing the innocent while letting the truly guilty pass due to the colour of their skin, is ludicrous. It's definitely neither effective nor cost-effective, and allows plenty of cracks through which terrorist operatives through.

And of course, people forget that Al Qaeda aren't the only terrorists you have to worry about. There are still people like Timothy McVeigh who managed to blow up the Alfred P. Murrah building no doubt in part due to the fact that seeing as he was white, no one suspected him of being a terrorist, even though there are many U.S. neo-Nazi, white-supremacist paramilitary groups who are hellbent on destroying the U.S. government because they believe the government and media are being controlled by rich, Communist Elders of Zion. :P Psychopathic terrorist crazies are not necessarily of one ethnic origin or another, and to automatically accuse those of a certain ethnicity of terrorism is contrary to judicial presumption of innocence until proof of guilt, and is definitely un-Constitutional and un-American. And I would hate to have to see 30-40 years down the line, the American taxpayers having to pay out another large sum of money as reparations to innocent Islamic-Americans or Americans of Middle Eastern descent whose "inalienable" rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution were willfully and prejudicially infringed by the U.S. government and law enforcement. Like what happened with Japanese-Americans during and after WWII. :P

/plays the FARK race card and throws in a Godwin card for good measure

sentient_being,

We're in very real danger from people destroying/vaporizing our major cities and the economic disaster that comes with it,

1)How do you know that? What proof do you have of this?

2)Assuming that we are in danger, why are we in any greater danger than we were 10 years ago? Al Qaeda is in ruins. They were the major player gunning for us. Shouldn't we actually be safer now than 10 years ago?

captain_napalm

yay, once again, liberals get beaten like they wandered into an epileptic carpenters anonymous meeting.


bizzarro land.

when did 'keeping government out of your life' become a liberal hallmark?

The fact that you don't have a problem it it scares the hell out of me.

Don't people read Jefferson anymore?


Wow, for the first time I seem to agree with Weaver95. This is even scarier than random ID checking

Cuchulane

Hehe, you're a perfect example of a partisan black and white farker everyone complains about...Republicans are evil geniuses who conspire to control all, while Democrats are good and fighting for whats right. I didn't want to get involved, but your attitudes and perceptions are way off in left field.

The republicans have already annointed him for greater things and shuffled him here from Utah merely as a stepping stone up the party ladder.

Mitt Romney lived in Massachusets. He moved to Utah to help manage the Olympics. When they were done, he immediately moved back. Unless, moving back to your home state is an evil Republican conspiracy...

He has been trying to stick it to the established democratic machine in Massachusetts since he arrived,

Ya, how dare Romney get elected by a vote of the people...in a traditionally liberal Democrat state no less. He must have really worked overtime to blind everyone to infiltrate the state government for his personal vendetta to screw Massachusetts over...

Bud, calm down a bit and try to not see the world in such a partisan, Republicans-are-pure-evil point of view. You've only accomplished to make the world worse for you and everyone else.

Anyone who would give up a nessisary freedom for a little temporary safety deserves neither freedom nor safety

shipud

what should shock you just as much as that...he seems to be the only regular conservative farker here that actually has a conservative's outlook on this.

Whatever, this already happens EVERY NIGHT.

Ever been pulled over by a cop in the middle of the night, say, somewhere between 3-5AM, with plates that identify you as someone from out of town?

Once a week when I come home from the late shift I get pulled over by a cop, who:

asks to see my ID,
asks for my registration
wants to know my destination
wants to know if I've been drinking
wants to know why I'm out so late
wants to know if I will be drinking later
wants to know why I'm so far from my house
eventually sends me on my way without a ticket or anything, telling me not to be out so late.


This kind of crap has gone on before 2000, it will go on after 2004 - and none of it is related to the Patriot Act.

2004-05-22 03:21:02 PM CadetHappy

Who has had their civil rights stepped on? Is this reference to the Patriot Act, which has more built in safety features than any other federal investigation program? Get a clue. Can anyone name a single person who has had their "rights" violated under the Patriot Act?

Yes!! I have!! Shrubya and his.. oh wait. No, my civil rights are just fine thanks. Carry on.

Speaking as a liberal, this type of government intrusion is a "bad touch." The Department of Education and the NEA, though, are A-OK. Using 1984 as a playbook isn't so kosher, though.

2004-05-22 05:46:37 PM Weaver95
Jefferson would be at the barricades with a rifle if he was alive for this crap. Guy didn't stand for much bs in his day. "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

nightronin --
Do you wear a mask when you walk around? Or, perhaps, have reconstructive surgery frequently? If not, you're not hiding your identity by not showing documentation -- you're just making it a technically much more difficult problem, but one that I would hardly be surprised if the government were funding research on.

SchlingFo I sure as hell would be complaining.

Heh, that's why I put "most" in my sentence. There's always a few people who hold to their beliefs regardless of partisan politics.

shipud

Yes, the same has happened to me. Quite scary indeed...

There's a case in front of the Supreme Court right now that's very pertinent to this situation. Hiibel v. Nevada. The decision should be coming just about any day now.

I became interested in the case last year, after I was arrested in Houston for refusing to ID myself to a Harris County Sheriff's Department deputy.

It's not new, it's not a result of the PATRIOT act, it's been happening forever.

In my case, I was just walking down the street near my home some time a little after 5AM. A cop (who already knew me, knew my name and my address, but whatever) pulled up, jumped out of his car and started asking me questions.

Cop: "Hey, didn't I stop you a couple weeks ago?"
Me: "Yep, how ya doin' deputy?"
Cop: "What are you up to?"
Me: "Just on my way home from the store."
Cop: "Where's home?"
Me: "[gave him my address], same as it was last time."
Cop: "I need to see your ID."
Me: "I don't have it."
Cop: "What's your name."
Me: "If you don't remember, I'm not telling you."
[cop grabs my arm]
[I pull away]
Cop: "Don't resist me!"
Me: "Ok, am I under arrest?"
Cop: "Yes."
Me: "For what?"
Cop: "Failure to I.D. to a police officer."

So I spent the rest of the day and night in the county jail (released on $200 bond). For refusing to speak my name. Turns out that in Texas, that's not a crime. For now. My case was dismissed. But I'm still pissed about it, and I now carry a copy of Texas Penal Code section 38.02 on my person at all times.

"A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, residence address, and date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information."

Fark you, deputy.

A terrorist's job is not to destroy property or kill people; but to, how shall I say it- invoke fear, mistrust, and a disruption of daily life. Since there is no way they can mount a credible millitary force, they are doing the best they can with what they've got. It's working just fine.

Oh, about that "no racial profiling" crap, it just means that an equal number of generally innocent non-Arab looking types will be stopped.

I have nothing to hide. Well, there are those movies I've previewed on P2P, and I guess that 200GB of porn doesn't look too good. Oh, yeah, there is a dead prostitute in my closet; still, I'm solidly behind this country a good 27.5%.

siniestro

Sorry man, didn't notice you had already wrote that
(and wrote it correctly too =P)

GraphicAddiction,

You have to get bodily searched to get into a concert.
You have to pee in a cup for work.

Those are both voluntary.

People don't have to work for a job that tests for drugs.

People don't have to go to a concert.

People do, however, have to travel.

Weaver:

We aren't exactly living in Jefferson's time. There are going to have to be times in our day and age where people make sacrifices for security. It doesn't have to be like Nazi Germany if we're careful in assessing the proper checks and balances.

It's getting to the point now with all of these damn weapons in the world and increasing individual power through technology where it's entirely possible to destroy an entire country with the proper planning.

Ignoring this issue and pretending we'll just be able to survive any hit they dish out is not very intelligent IMHO. I'm for examining the mistakes of the past that led to abuses and trying new forms of doctrine to improve security. Is there anyone here that would agree our current style of governance is perfect? WHOA put your hands DOWN!

Ignoring the threat and going back to apple pie and no checks anywhere is a lazy, careless, and overly idealistic way to go about addressing issues that on 9/11 were proven to be very real.

GraphicAddiction --
No comparison. Concerts and most employers are private affairs, whereas public transportation is supposed to be a public good.
In addition, most people will have much greater freedom to reject a prospective employer whose terms they dislike compared to choosing a different mass transportation system. Reject the train system, then you may be forced to an entirely different method such as an automobile.

JacksBlack,

There are a lot of bad cops out there. They are the ones that, instead of attempting to defuse a situation, will choose to elevate the situation.

sentient_being,

Could you please answer the two questions I posed to you?

icy_one

No joke. I had a newspaper route while I was in college (back in 98-99). I'd get pulled over once a week for nothing.

At first, I just tolerated it and answered their questions. This got old after about three months.

So I started giving them my license and insurance.
Officer: Where are you going?
Me: To work. I have a newspaper route.
Office: How long have you had it, have you been drinking, how long have you lived there, etc.
Me: With all due respect officer, these questions are irrevelant to the task at hand. As I am under suspicion for no crime, I do not feel a need to answer them.

This usually made them mad. A few times, the officer messed with me (field sobriety test, etc). I complained to the police and it got a little better after six months.

Still, there is no reason for that kind of stuff. Pulling someone over when there is no evidence of wrongdoing is bullcrap.

This whole debate doesn't seem to be about left vs. right, but mainly, libertarians vs. moderates (or even authoritarians, but I haven't seen too many of them here).

The libertarians argue that this is a big deal because it puts us slippery slope, its a small eroding of civil rights that we most likely won't get back, and showing ID's is a useless way of catching terrorists. Plus, we should be free of the government stopping us and asking who we are before doing daily tasks like getting on a train

The moderates here seem to argue that this isn't a big deal at all. We have drivers licenses, car license plates, social security numbers. Also, we have to product ID to get on airplanes, cops pull us over and ask us simple questions during routine traffic violatins, and your name will always be in government files. So given that, what's the big deal of asking for an ID before train rides? Sure, its something we didn't do before, and maybe it is a teeny chip off civil rights, but is it anything to get worked up over? Life didn't change when the government did all these things before, and it probably won't change now. In the big scheme of things, this is a non-issue

Authoritarians tend to mention having security from terrorists. Is it better to be free with civil rights, or free from terrorists. They would say freedom from terrorists definitely trumps it. And the government is the best way to do this.

Anyways, just trying my best to sum up all sides. I usually find its good to see all sides of the issue first, and then if you want to get someone to change their position, try to explain the issue understanding how they see it.

You either have liberty or you don't, it's not incremental. Checks and balances, please.

So I spent the rest of the day and night in the county jail (released on $200 bond). For refusing to speak my name. Turns out that in Texas, that's not a crime. For now. My case was dismissed. But I'm still pissed about it, and I now carry a copy of Texas Penal Code section 38.02 on my person at all times.

apparently SOME jerks think it is ok to to detain someone for 2 weeks, 1 night whatever (not to mention any names).

What no one has mentioned is the damage it does even if you are released and everything is OK. If anyone is arrested, guily or innocent, the damage is already done. Captain says it's ok to be detained for whatever reason and let the system work it out. He says "fine, he was released, blah blah. Well chief, his reputation has been tarnished for life as a result.

If you are arrested, and proven innocent, your record still shows you were arrested. Now you get to explain to every future employer why you were arrested, even if innocent. Lots of employers dont really care if you were innocent or not, they simply dont even want to deal with someone who was arrested for whatever reason, especially if it relates to terrorism or the patriot act. It looks bad for the companies, depending on the companies views and rules of course.

Your life can get screwed up really easily in the long term with actions like this

Graphic,

Ah, yes. But do they HAVE to travel by train?

For a lot of people, yes, the train/subway is the only viable mode of transportation.

But, even if it's not, the courts have always upheld the idea that freedom of travel is fundamentally important. Even though it is never found in the constitution, the courts have ruled that the government should not restrict the movement of the people throughout the country with excessive rules and regulations.

I feel that this is excessive. If the subways were a private enterprise, then I would have no problem with it. But, being as they are run by the government, it changes things substantially.....in my opinion.

Boston is synonymous with socialism so what do you expect?

One of the points in my post is that we DON'T live in their time. Or are you going to pretend the founding fathers were clairvoyant geniuses that could see all the dynamics of future society in America?

I'm sorry I have to break this to you, but people DO make sacrifices every day for security already. The threat of mass destruction, which is incontrovertibly real, is a big enough problem to examine whether or not some fine-tuning is warranted in our security measures.

To wave your hand and dismiss this practically warrants our own destruction.

I might note that I do have a problem with being asked about activities or purpose. If I were planning to travel around Boston for nefarious activities, I would be insulted if they believed me incapable of having a plausible cover story. Nor, for that matter, are my purposes normally nearly as public as my location even in a public venue.

Korovyov, as a matter of act I do wear a mask. I'm a superhero

After looking back at my post I did notice the way it was written, but only having about 3hrs slep in two days has affected my comminucation ability a tad