<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NYC&#8217;s Random Searches</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:49:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Roberts</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56319</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Roberts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56319</guid>
		<description>Nice picture.  Equally as lethal as the milk jug I left in my fridge for too long when I was in college.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice picture.  Equally as lethal as the milk jug I left in my fridge for too long when I was in college.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baklava</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56290</link>
		<dc:creator>Baklava</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 20:15:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56290</guid>
		<description>Andy S. I know. The difficulty is that we have to address lefties sometimes who will say things like &quot;assert our rights when we encounter subway searches&quot;. 

We all know that bombs could be planted on grandma&#039;s. For us conservatives though, we know it&#039;s about the security resources we have, and it&#039;s about the best way to use those limited resources to ensure the our safety smartly not purposely stupidly.

There could be random searches on top of &quot;smart&quot; security work (which would be trying to establish profiles). If we don&#039;t have the resources to search &quot;everyone&quot;, then we either do things completely randomly or assert some common sense and smartness into the mix. 

And the random searches (on top of the smart searches) could morph into something else later if there is a different pattern later. Obviously that is why airports want you to ALWAYS have COMPLETE control of your bags. That way you know if you are being used or not. You see someone slip something in your bag you are alerting the police. Thanks for playing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andy S. I know. The difficulty is that we have to address lefties sometimes who will say things like &#8220;assert our rights when we encounter subway searches&#8221;. </p>
<p>We all know that bombs could be planted on grandma&#8217;s. For us conservatives though, we know it&#8217;s about the security resources we have, and it&#8217;s about the best way to use those limited resources to ensure the our safety smartly not purposely stupidly.</p>
<p>There could be random searches on top of &#8220;smart&#8221; security work (which would be trying to establish profiles). If we don&#8217;t have the resources to search &#8220;everyone&#8221;, then we either do things completely randomly or assert some common sense and smartness into the mix. </p>
<p>And the random searches (on top of the smart searches) could morph into something else later if there is a different pattern later. Obviously that is why airports want you to ALWAYS have COMPLETE control of your bags. That way you know if you are being used or not. You see someone slip something in your bag you are alerting the police. Thanks for playing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raymond</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56280</link>
		<dc:creator>Raymond</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 20:07:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56280</guid>
		<description>Andy S.  I&#039;ll raise you one.  The only effective way is to either ban packages, or do 100% searches like El-Al airlines does and the likelihood of muslims recruiting old white ladies to carry bombs in a back pack is slim to none.

When was the last time you saw an old white lady carrying a back pack off one shoulder?  Come on now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andy S.  I&#8217;ll raise you one.  The only effective way is to either ban packages, or do 100% searches like El-Al airlines does and the likelihood of muslims recruiting old white ladies to carry bombs in a back pack is slim to none.</p>
<p>When was the last time you saw an old white lady carrying a back pack off one shoulder?  Come on now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy S.</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56277</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy S.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:59:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56277</guid>
		<description>Guys, you&#039;re missing the point -- this is not about political correctness.  Any pattern to the searches represents a vulnerability.  If it becomes known that grandmas are unlikely to be searched, you recruit a grandma to carry your bomb, or you dupe her into carrying one for you, or you sneak it into her bag, etc.

The only safe strategy for searches requires a high degree of randomness.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Guys, you&#8217;re missing the point &#8212; this is not about political correctness.  Any pattern to the searches represents a vulnerability.  If it becomes known that grandmas are unlikely to be searched, you recruit a grandma to carry your bomb, or you dupe her into carrying one for you, or you sneak it into her bag, etc.</p>
<p>The only safe strategy for searches requires a high degree of randomness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baklava</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56267</link>
		<dc:creator>Baklava</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:42:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56267</guid>
		<description>The right to what kris?

Nowhere is there a right to not having your bags searched before going on a subway. 

I have my bags searched before I get into the CA State Fair, Sunsplash Waterslide park in Roseville, The plane, The Strawberry Festival in Roseville, CA. 

Shucks, I should&#039;ve staged a protest as my &quot;rights&quot; were violated huh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The right to what kris?</p>
<p>Nowhere is there a right to not having your bags searched before going on a subway. </p>
<p>I have my bags searched before I get into the CA State Fair, Sunsplash Waterslide park in Roseville, The plane, The Strawberry Festival in Roseville, CA. </p>
<p>Shucks, I should&#8217;ve staged a protest as my &#8220;rights&#8221; were violated huh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kris</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56266</link>
		<dc:creator>kris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56266</guid>
		<description>Regarding the subway searches, be sure and check out The Citizen&#039;s Guide to Refusing New York Subway Searches put out by the Flex Your Rights Foundation. It teaches subway riders exactly what they need to know in order to assert their rights when they encounter a subway search.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the subway searches, be sure and check out The Citizen&#8217;s Guide to Refusing New York Subway Searches put out by the Flex Your Rights Foundation. It teaches subway riders exactly what they need to know in order to assert their rights when they encounter a subway search.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baklava</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56261</link>
		<dc:creator>Baklava</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:11:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56261</guid>
		<description>Robert #17 wrote, &quot;But it DOES prevent an unreasonable search as being a prerequisite for getting on the subway.&quot;

I&#039;m glad you wrote the next sentence because I don&#039;t think it&#039;s unreasonable for authorities to search bags before people can get on the subway. If you don&#039;t want to be searched then don&#039;t go on the subway. The people who do go on the subway would then be safer...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Robert #17 wrote, &#8220;But it DOES prevent an unreasonable search as being a prerequisite for getting on the subway.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m glad you wrote the next sentence because I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s unreasonable for authorities to search bags before people can get on the subway. If you don&#8217;t want to be searched then don&#8217;t go on the subway. The people who do go on the subway would then be safer&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baklava</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56260</link>
		<dc:creator>Baklava</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:09:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56260</guid>
		<description>Matt #13,

We have a constitutional right to get on a plane and not have our bags searched?

We have a constitutional right to get on a subway and not have our bags searched?

Hum. I&#039;ll have to remember that next time I get on mass transit. I&#039;ll be sure to protest, carry signs and refuse (in front of my daughters) to have my bags searched.... because it says it in the constitution. Ack. I&#039;m losing my precious constitutional rights by having my bags searched. Someone help me !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt #13,</p>
<p>We have a constitutional right to get on a plane and not have our bags searched?</p>
<p>We have a constitutional right to get on a subway and not have our bags searched?</p>
<p>Hum. I&#8217;ll have to remember that next time I get on mass transit. I&#8217;ll be sure to protest, carry signs and refuse (in front of my daughters) to have my bags searched&#8230;. because it says it in the constitution. Ack. I&#8217;m losing my precious constitutional rights by having my bags searched. Someone help me !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56217</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:24:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56217</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;Abuse of your Constitutional Rights? Where in the Constitution does it say that you have a right to ride the subway or the train? I wasnâ€™t aware of any trains or subways in the 1700s.&lt;/em&gt;

Raymond et al. -- here&#039;s the Fourth Amendment: 

&lt;em&gt;&quot;The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;

So of course this doesn&#039;t provide a Constitutional guarantee of being able to use mass transit whenever and however you like. But it DOES prevent an unreasonable search as being a prerequisite for getting on the subway. (Note that I&#039;m not saying that the random bag search is &quot;unreasonable&quot;... just that if it were, there&#039;d be some 4th Amendment issues.) 

The bigger question even then the 4th Amendment is, again, whether this policy actually works or not, and whether resources would be better spent on other things. 

There&#039;s a whole lot of interesting background and commentary on this at 
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/
Well worth a read because of the importance of the  issues involved here.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Abuse of your Constitutional Rights? Where in the Constitution does it say that you have a right to ride the subway or the train? I wasnâ€™t aware of any trains or subways in the 1700s.</em></p>
<p>Raymond et al. &#8212; here&#8217;s the Fourth Amendment: </p>
<p><em>&#8220;The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>So of course this doesn&#8217;t provide a Constitutional guarantee of being able to use mass transit whenever and however you like. But it DOES prevent an unreasonable search as being a prerequisite for getting on the subway. (Note that I&#8217;m not saying that the random bag search is &#8220;unreasonable&#8221;&#8230; just that if it were, there&#8217;d be some 4th Amendment issues.) </p>
<p>The bigger question even then the 4th Amendment is, again, whether this policy actually works or not, and whether resources would be better spent on other things. </p>
<p>There&#8217;s a whole lot of interesting background and commentary on this at<br />
<a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/" rel="nofollow">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/</a><br />
Well worth a read because of the importance of the  issues involved here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raymond</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56184</link>
		<dc:creator>Raymond</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 16:05:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56184</guid>
		<description>While we are on the Constitution, wouldn&#039;t it be nice if there were elected officials who would challenge judical activists up to and including the Supreme Court by using Article III, Section 2:

&quot;...In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such EXCEPTIONS, and under such Regulations as the CONGRESS SHALL MAKE.&quot;

In other words, Congress still maintains final say as to the jurisdiction of the Judicial Branch if only someone had the man berries to challenge some of their stupid rulings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While we are on the Constitution, wouldn&#8217;t it be nice if there were elected officials who would challenge judical activists up to and including the Supreme Court by using Article III, Section 2:</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230;In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such EXCEPTIONS, and under such Regulations as the CONGRESS SHALL MAKE.&#8221;</p>
<p>In other words, Congress still maintains final say as to the jurisdiction of the Judicial Branch if only someone had the man berries to challenge some of their stupid rulings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shipwrecked</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56181</link>
		<dc:creator>Shipwrecked</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56181</guid>
		<description>Just another waste of police resources, searching people who are obviously not terrorists. It won&#039;t stop the determined terrorist. 

Maybe Raymond -12, has a good point. If we put the fear of retribution into the Muslim community, they might not be so keen to aid and abet the terrorists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just another waste of police resources, searching people who are obviously not terrorists. It won&#8217;t stop the determined terrorist. </p>
<p>Maybe Raymond -12, has a good point. If we put the fear of retribution into the Muslim community, they might not be so keen to aid and abet the terrorists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raymond</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56180</link>
		<dc:creator>Raymond</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:53:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56180</guid>
		<description>Abuse of your Constitutional Rights?  Where in the Constitution does it say that you have a right to ride the subway or the train?  I wasn&#039;t aware of any trains or subways in the 1700s.

Aaaah, but the Constitution does say that you have the right to refuse UNREASONABLE search and seizure.  For those with a public school &quot;education&quot; that means you have the right to say &quot;No, you cannot search my bag or my person.&quot;

Oh and one other thing, the Constitution in the Preamble clearly states that we have established that the nation must &quot;provide for the common defense.&quot;  Which part of COMMON defense don&#039;t you understand?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Abuse of your Constitutional Rights?  Where in the Constitution does it say that you have a right to ride the subway or the train?  I wasn&#8217;t aware of any trains or subways in the 1700s.</p>
<p>Aaaah, but the Constitution does say that you have the right to refuse UNREASONABLE search and seizure.  For those with a public school &#8220;education&#8221; that means you have the right to say &#8220;No, you cannot search my bag or my person.&#8221;</p>
<p>Oh and one other thing, the Constitution in the Preamble clearly states that we have established that the nation must &#8220;provide for the common defense.&#8221;  Which part of COMMON defense don&#8217;t you understand?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56179</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:45:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56179</guid>
		<description>Well, you can refuse and turn around, then walk down to the next stop, and turn around again and try the same stop 5 minutes later. So can any terrorist. Or, the terrorist could simply detonate right at the search stop, generating terror all the same.

This procedure does not help, only serves as an abuse of your CONSTITUTIONAL rights, use &#039;em or lose &#039;em.

http://www.flexyourrights.org/subway/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, you can refuse and turn around, then walk down to the next stop, and turn around again and try the same stop 5 minutes later. So can any terrorist. Or, the terrorist could simply detonate right at the search stop, generating terror all the same.</p>
<p>This procedure does not help, only serves as an abuse of your CONSTITUTIONAL rights, use &#8216;em or lose &#8216;em.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.flexyourrights.org/subway/" rel="nofollow">http://www.flexyourrights.org/subway/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raymond</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56172</link>
		<dc:creator>Raymond</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:20:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56172</guid>
		<description>I think the best solution is to go to mosques.  Take pictures of the terrorists (muslims) going and coming.  Write down license numbers.  Find out where all of these fools live, watch their actions,tap their phone lines, see who their kids associate with and generally intimidate them into leaving this nation.

Sound anti-American?  Good because they are!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the best solution is to go to mosques.  Take pictures of the terrorists (muslims) going and coming.  Write down license numbers.  Find out where all of these fools live, watch their actions,tap their phone lines, see who their kids associate with and generally intimidate them into leaving this nation.</p>
<p>Sound anti-American?  Good because they are!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ptm</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/comment-page-1/#comment-56168</link>
		<dc:creator>ptm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:13:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2005/07/28/nyc/#comment-56168</guid>
		<description>I agree that this sure sounds like the moderately absurd TSA airport checkpoints, but it seems to me that it might work.  At least, there&#039;s some search percentage at which the terrorists would choose other (non-subway) venues, which is the goal.  Plainly effectively searching 100% of passengers would do it.  Presumably a small fraction of a percent would not.  20 percent might.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that this sure sounds like the moderately absurd TSA airport checkpoints, but it seems to me that it might work.  At least, there&#8217;s some search percentage at which the terrorists would choose other (non-subway) venues, which is the goal.  Plainly effectively searching 100% of passengers would do it.  Presumably a small fraction of a percent would not.  20 percent might.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

