I will be voting Republican. The Democrats will lose the war in a disgraceful hurry, just like they've wanted to for years. That will make Osama very very happy, just like killing thousands of Americans does. So the Dem Party is just too big a pack of morons to merit support by anyone with a respect for freedom.

Voting Dems in will not fix this DC problem, Dar.

But will it make it worse?

Um. The Patriot Act was passed under a Republican majority.

Leaving Republicans in won't make it get any less oppressive, either.

It would seem so, unless they are just trying to set a precedent. Then when someone suspicious, maybe someone they have been watching, tries to board the train, they can search them without later being challenged in court. :idea:

Only the first time. The second time it was passed and renewed in toto by under a Demoncratically controlled Congress. Don't try to blame that on anyone but the Demoncrats and Pelosi.

Technically, you are right. And that's why their lawyers tell them they can get away with this. I don't have to consent to a search. I can always find another way to work. It's optional.

But when you look at the numbers, and see that 1.2 million people ride a bus or train in this city each and every day, you see that it's part of everyday life. It's really not optional. Then, when you think about how many other things out there are technically "optional" and that they could use as an excuse to search you, it becomes obvious that this is a slippery slope.

LJ crosses the NJ border every day to get to work. Border crossings make a nice place to set up a random checkpoint. The authorities could very easily say that it's optional that you travel across borders and that a search there is just fine. There are all sorts of borders. Checkpoints could be set up at county borders within each state. Or at the city limits. Precinct border. It's optional that you cross a border.

With only 15 cops policing 1.2 million people, this will have ZERO effect on the terrorists, but it will have a 100% effect of violating the basic rights of each law abiding commuter who is coerced into consenting to a search or is blocked from their daily commute because they refuse the search.

Coercion seems like such a strong word there. They can ask - you can refuse. I agree that someone who uses public transit may not realistically have another option. The "for the greater safety of all" argument has been abused too much already. I dunno. I'm not happy about it either in principle.

It is strong, but I think it's accurate. Coercion is making somebody do something they don't want to do by have an alternative that is even worse. I don't think the majority of commuters want to be searched. The only reason they would submit is because they judge that submitting is better than being late to work and possibly losing their job.

Dude, it was ORIGINALLY passed by the republickins. It was re-passed by the Demoncratic Majority Congress. They own it now.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...06/19/telecom/

A nice little ditty:

http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/c...cussionID=3750

These signs appeared yesterday. This one is in a dark corner, out of the way, and not visible to people entering the station. You can only see it on your way out (Unless you routinely look behind you as you walk forward.) In other stations, they are prominent and well lit.

They have that sign in most stores, malls and shopping centers.

But in those places, they won't search you unless they see you steal something. It's called probable cause.

I've had a cursory search of my bag for about 20 years now.
Entering concerts, museums, galleries, theatres... and Harrods.

I haven't noticed an increase in searches since America was bombed. But then we've never been systematically searched on public transport either.