Metro searching bags

[Repeater]

They can say 'Special Needs'

That, and what authority do they have to deny you access if you refuse consent.

I wanna see the rights-dissolving statute.

Your rights are already gone. Good bye. It's Special Needs.

The 'Needs' of the many (LEOs/Agents) outweigh the rights of the few.

 

[McX]

Your rights are already gone. Good bye. It's Special Needs.

The 'Needs' of the many (LEOs/Agents) outweigh the rights of the few.

.......................................................................or the one?

 

[Dreamer]

I'm thinking that most of my coats, several pairs of boots, and almost every backpack, book bag, and briefcase I own would test "positive" because all of them have had, at one time or another, spent brass, freshly fired firearms, reloading ingredients, or fireworks in them...

Oh, BTW, the plant fertilizer "Miracle Grow" will cause these "electronic sniffers" to give an off-the-charts false positive.

I don't mean nothin' by that, I'm just sayin'...

 

[CHILINVLN]

The Metro station is not part of the cemetery and is not part of the pentagon

This.

 

[Mr H]

The boy picked a great day to have a birthday (it's mine too).

I checked too.. and while it might be within the bounfry MAP of the reservation, it is not part of the reservation. Maybe you can get nabbed if you leave the station while armed.. but the station, and tracks are not.

One quick OT comment...

It is indeed a great day for a birthday!! My Grandson turned 2 today.

YAY!!!

;-))

 

[Citizen]

Your rights are already gone. Good bye. It's Special Needs.

The 'Needs' of the many (LEOs/Agents) outweigh the rights of the few.

I wonder where we would find the authorizing legislation? Patriot Act? VA statute?

 

[JoeSparky]

i wonder where we would find the authorizing legislation? Patriot act? Va statute?

other secret legislation that us mere citizen"s are not allowed to know about!

 

[ed]

What if you find a gun?

http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/news/faqs/preview.cfm?faqID=50#378

What if you find a gun?
The District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia have different gun laws. Metro Transit Police will take the appropriate action based on the laws of the jurisdiction.

 

[Stafford_1911]

Well then, HAPPY BELATED BIRTHDAY to all.

I am now thoroughly confused however. How can any entity exist within the confines of a DOD reservation and not be subject to its rules and regulations? The impression I have is the only exemption to that is for codified municipalities.

The only document I have found to support my position is the architect’s presentation that seems to indicate the station is actually owned by the DOD, but may just mean the project. Unfortunately I can’t verify the source, so I concede the loose for the cite. It is here however: http://www.vsbn.org/docs/GOV_Pentagon_Metro_Entrance_Facility.pdf

 

[Repeater]

'Special Needs' is whatever the courts feels is reasonable

I wonder where we would find the authorizing legislation? Patriot Act? VA statute?

Not secret at all; easy to find, if you look. For example:

1) Macwade v. Kelly, 460 F. 3d 260 (2nd Circuit, 2006)

When the risk is the jeopardy to hundreds of human lives and millions of dollars of property inherent in the pirating or blowing up of a large airplane, the danger alone meets the test of reasonableness, so long as the search is conducted in good faith for the purpose of preventing hijacking or like damage and with reasonable scope and the passenger has been given advance notice of his liability to such a search so that he can avoid it by choosing not to travel by air.

...

Although a subway rider enjoys a full privacy expectation in the contents of his baggage, the kind of search at issue here minimally intrudes upon that interest.

...

In sum, we hold that the Program is reasonable, and therefore constitutional, because (1) preventing a terrorist attack on the subway is a special need; (2) that need is weighty; (3) the Program is a reasonably effective deterrent; and (4) even though the searches intrude on a full privacy interest, they do so to a minimal degree.

2) Cassidy v. Chertoff, 471 F. 3d 67 (2nd Circuit, 2006)

Plaintiffs contend that LCT's policy of requiring passengers to submit to security checks before boarding ferries on two of its Lake Champlain routes violates their Fourth Amendment rights.

...

In a limited set of circumstances, however, the Supreme Court has held that a search warrant, and the requisite showing of probable cause, are not required. A search unsupported by probable cause may be constitutional "when special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, make the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable."

...

While plaintiffs enjoy undiminished privacy expectations in their carry-on baggage and we presume such undiminished expectation in the trunks of their vehicles, we find that the remaining two factors under the "special needs" doctrine weigh heavily in the government's favor. Indeed, given that both the intrusions on plaintiffs' privacy interests are minimal and the measures adopted by LCT are reasonably efficacious in serving the government's undisputedly important special need to protect ferry passengers and crew from terrorist acts, we find no constitutional violation.

3) "Sacrificing the End to the Means": The Constitutionality of Suspicionless Subway Searches

These programs are all a legitimate and necessary response to a terrorist stratagem directed at transit systems. A successful attack on a transit system in the United States could result in mass casualties, disable a city's system, disrupt commerce, and demoralize the entire nation. Moreover, the potential for a catastrophic attack involving nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological weapons alarmingly is not farfetched. In light of these extreme risks, the minimal intrusion occasioned by suspicionless subway searches is reasonable.

 

[Thundar]

We need innovative solutions to these gross intrusions. I recommend the flash mob. When we find a warrantless search station in Virginia, we dial porc or some other pre-arranged number. Everybody goes there open carrying. Bring a bag and refuse to be searched. When the metro SS tell you that you cannot board, tell them you will wait at your current location until the warrantless searches are ended.

Bet they wouldn't like 15 or 20 armed open carriers waiting for them to be finished in the metro station.

 

[Uber_Olafsun]

We need innovative solutions to these gross intrusions. I recommend the flash mob. When we find a warrantless search station in Virginia, we dial porc or some other pre-arranged number. Everybody goes there open carrying. Bring a bag and refuse to be searched. When the metro SS tell you that you cannot board, tell them you will wait at your current location until the warrantless searches are ended.

Bet they wouldn't like 15 or 20 armed open carriers waiting for them to be finished in the metro station.

What would be funny is if they tried to search only the OCers. What happened to random??? Profiling?

 

[Dreamer]

Yeah, they'd NEVER arrest 15 or 20 people, and then institute a media blackout so nobody ever found out about it through the MSM...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/16/white-house-antiwar-protesters-arrest_n_797899.html

Can you say "1984 memory hole" boys and girls?...

 

[ed]

I realize my postcard will take a couple days to arrive... but my e-mail won't and my call was never returned (when someone was going to call me "right back"). So I will call the chief tomorrow late morning and see whats up.

 

[palerider116]

It appears at best a couple of the officers skipped legals week at the academy. Then there is that possibility that the message was never delivered to the sergeant. At worst its a directive from the top down. Finding the root of the problem will allow a meaningful remedy to be applied.

If the Chief has a correct understanding of the law, then he needs to be encouraged to have a training bulletin sent department wide to educate his department. If he has an incorrect knowledge, then he needs to be educated and that education needs to go from the top down.

We may want to start a collective effort to start writing training bulletins for departments who have incorrect positions, and have them checked by some legal counsel (user is a great source there). Having seen my fair share of training bulletins, they are typically one to two pages, and iterate a law and clarify it in plain speak. Sometimes a lawsuit is included in the text to demonstrate the gravity of the training bulletin.

Its an option we may want to explore.

 

[Uber_Olafsun]

Yeah, they'd NEVER arrest 15 or 20 people, and then institute a media blackout so nobody ever found out about it through the MSM...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/16/white-house-antiwar-protesters-arrest_n_797899.html

Can you say "1984 memory hole" boys and girls?...

I don't know if it was blacked out or just DADT was blocking everything else. All bow before the supreme dictator and his party.

It amazes me that one of the reasons it's legal is because they have it posted and you don't have to take the metro. Tell that to all the morning comuters. Or better yet have them all drive in to work one day and see how that works out.

 

[Citizen]

I realize my postcard will take a couple days to arrive... but my e-mail won't and my call was never returned (when someone was going to call me "right back"). So I will call the chief tomorrow late morning and see whats up.

Ed, Ed, Ed, <mock-sadly shaking head>

You're too diplomatic about these things. Suggested edits:

"enhanced screening procedures" ---> "tyrannical, intrusive, useless theatrics"

"random searches ---> "abject violations of the warrant clause"

 

[richarcm]

The first thing that came to my mind when someone posted this on my FB page was......OC event.

 

[palerider116]

Ed, Ed, Ed, <mock-sadly shaking head>

You're too diplomatic about these things. Suggested edits:

"enhanced screening procedures" ---> "tyrannical, intrusive, useless theatrics"

"random searches ---> "abject violations of the warrant clause"

The fourth amendment is universal in scope. A search warrant must be obtained with probable cause. There are some exceptions, such as the Carroll Doctrine, search incident to arrest, vehicle inventorying, and consent to search. Outside of that, I don't see any wiggle room for any government or private agency to get around the fourth amendment. It cannot be violated by a "citizen" - for instance, a burglar breaks into a residence and finds the cocaine sitting out on the coffee table. He cannot seize it and turn it over to the police because not only has he committed a burglary, he has violated your fourth amendment right to be protected against unreasonable search and seizure. By "searching" the residence and "seizing" evidence, the fourth amendment has been violated.

When you consent to a violation, it creates a false sense of legitimacy. If they asked me if I mind being searched, I wouldn't mind. I'd give them fair warning that they will find one of Gaston Glock's little polymer children on my right hip and two spare magazines on the left. But to tell me "YOU! You are going to be checked!".... no thanks. I'll drive. Ask me, I may or may not say yes. Make a demand of me, and see how far that gets you.

As for flying...I'll drive. My wife chides me but I know that I have control of the vehicle, and I am armed. Have gun, will travel.

 

[ed]

Ed, Ed, Ed, <mock-sadly shaking head>

You're too diplomatic about these things. Suggested edits:

"enhanced screening procedures" ---> "tyrannical, intrusive, useless theatrics"

"random searches ---> "abject violations of the warrant clause"

Citizen... Go ahead.. show me how it's done... www.amazingmail.com sign up NOW and get 10 free cards
:dude: