The subway-search Maginot Line continues apace. On Monday, I went into a station through an entrance with two sets of turnstiles in an L-shape. Officers were stopping commuters in front of one set of turnstiles, but people poured through the other bank unobserved. Would this have stopped anyone with evil in his or her heart? I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader. But as I watched, I noticed a photographer with a professional-grade camera snapping pictures. So perhaps the intended purpose was being fulfilled, after all.
I don't have anything against being safer, I'd just prefer that the NYPD spend more resources on measures that might actually make it less likely that people get killed. Until then, I still plan to refuse any search. Unless people suddenly wise up, I feel like it's only a matter of time. You see, I frequently carry a backpack, and we all know how subversive those can be.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Okay, I'll bite... As a management prof once told me in college... "never send your boss a problem without a solution." You have a problem and it is evident that you're upset about it. What's the solution?
I thought this was going to be a post about reality TV.
it sorta is. you start watching in disbelief that someone could posibly think this is a good idea and you don't want to watch, but it is so asinine that you can't look away.
"Never offer a problem without a solution?" I'm not really sure this applies here, because as I understand it, the problem is unreasonable and ineffective invasions of the privacy of private citizens.
I just assumed that the solution went without saying, but just in case it doesn't...
"Don't unreasonably and ineffectively invade the privacy of private citizens."
first before this goes to far. I'm onboard with this being stupid and the gov-uh-mint wanting to scare us into the duct-taped safety of our homes.
The problem as the NYC officials see it is not "unreasonable and ineffective invasions of the privacy of private citizens" (that doesn't concern them at all). The problem is the very real idea that someone could try to blow up a bomb on the subway. Afterall without that as a the problem the city wouldn't be searching people getting on the subway. Maybe they would, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
Problem: People wanting to blow up subways.
Solution: Bomb sniffing dogs on platforms. I think that's better than searching every bag for oh so many reasons (probably hella expensive and not practical but then again a lot cheaper than spending billions of dollars on a war that didn't need to be fought, yet i digress). And yes, Mr. Rancounteur and I discussed the low likelihood of this already. But it is an idea and more importantly a counter-offer to the one NYC has suggested.
I guess the real problem that we need to address is people wanting to blow us (and them) up. So, how the hell do we do that? How do we prevent terrorism? Let's (America) get a solid plan together and then *DO THAT*. Brainstorm, put them all down, pick the best ones and throw some money at it. Should we shoot down the stupid ideas like this, hell yes; but, and this may sound crazy, do it constructively (i.e. this is stupid we should be doing this instead). That's all I'm trying to say. That and push Flop's buttons to get him all biled up and pissed of. Nothing says fun like Floppy all full of piss and vinegar.
Proposed solution: U.S. military bombs the whole world, U.S. included. This will stop all terrorists and lower the attractiveness of all domestic targets. It will end the U.S., but if the U.S. is going to end sometime, as all things must, at least we go out on our own terms.
I just solved all problems. Top that.
Post a Comment