NYCLU to sue NY police department

Why? Because:

The New York Civil Liberties Union plans to file a lawsuit today challenging the legality of the Police Department’s new policy of randomly searching bags and packages in the subway system.

The lawsuit, to be filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan, contends that the searches are "virtually certain neither to catch any person trying to carry explosives into the subway nor to deter such an effort." It also says that many riders have been selected in a "discriminatory and arbitrary" manner, creating the potential for racial profiling.

So what they’re arguing is two things: 1) random searches in and of themselves are useless and 2) random searches create the potential of ‘racial profiling.’ That’s code for: searching people who fit the profile. They don’t like that.

The policy:

Under the search policy, officers are to use an essentially random criterion – stopping every 5th, 12th or 20th passenger carrying a bag or package. Selecting riders on the basis of race or national origin is prohibited.

Some on the NY City Council yesterday asked the police department to start compiling figures on the race and ethnicity of riders who get searched so they can prove that one group is not being targeted over the other. The spokesman for the police department, Paul J. Browne, said the police department plans to do no such thing. Thankfully, the police department is focusing on doing what needs to be done (protecting the city) rather than wasting valuable time compiling stats in order to try and please the bureaucrats and the people who claim to care about your civil liberties. Spurring on this request were comments by two bold NY state lawmakers:

One of those lawmakers, State Assemblyman Dov Hikind, a Brooklyn Democrat, said, "There is a terrorist profile for a potential suicide bomber, and it’s not the 75-year-old grandmother with sloping shoulders, who has an oversized tote bag firmly tucked under her arm."

The other lawmaker, Councilman James S. Oddo, a Republican who represents parts of Staten Island and Brooklyn, said, "Plain and simply, young Arab fundamentalists are the individuals undertaking these acts of terror," and added that he agreed with Mr. Hikind.

These guys are on the right track. But not to politically correct bureaucrats like Councilman Robert Jackson, Manhattan Democrat who said:

[…] extremists came in all forms. "A bomber or terrorist could look like you or I."

Oh really? I don’t what news programs Councilman Jackson’s been watching over the years, but the 9-11 hijackers didn’t look like you or me, the first attackers of the WTC don’t look like you or me, the London terrorists didn’t look like you or me, nor do the USS Cole terrorists, nor do the Kenya and Tanzania terrorists. I could go on and on.

If the NY police are profiling, good for them! My suggestion is for the city pencil pushers and the NYCLU to leave the NYPD alone rather than subject them to pointless demands for ‘proof’ that they aren’t profiling. There are people out there in this world who want to kill us. To the PC crowd in NYC: please let the NYPD do their jobs in protecting us from those threats.

Afternoon update: La Shawn’s thoughts.

16 Responses to "NYCLU to sue NY police department"

actus says:

August 4, 2005 at 9:29 am

” “Plain and simply, young Arab fundamentalists are the individuals undertaking these acts of terror,” ”

Not subway bombings. The london bombings were carried out by a jamaican, some south asians, and some east africans. That right there is the problem with racial profiling. Well, besides the plain problem that it is unconstitutional.

Now what could work is behavioral profiling: looking for suspicious behavior and activity.
Eric Jacobson says:

August 4, 2005 at 9:45 am

The NYCLU are apparently composed of idiots. Civil liberty #1 is being able to stay alive and safe. The police aren’t infringing ANYONE’s civil liberties by stopping somebody and searching their belongings or person. Nobody’s hurt, nobody’s harmed.

With ‘friends’ like these were bound to experience another atrocity. Then, of course, the NYCLU will doubtless blame the police for ‘not being diligent enough’….

Morons. Why don’t they go out and do something useful with their existences?
Sister Toldjah says:

August 4, 2005 at 9:47 am

Actus: Somehow it doesn’t surprise me that you’d side with the NYCLU on this.

Eric: Absolutely.
actus says:

August 4, 2005 at 10:03 am

“Actus: Somehow it doesn’t surprise me that you’d side with the NYCLU on this.”

And it doesn’t surprise me that tons of rural red staters are fine with telling NY how to go about protecting itself. The village voice recently had a rash of something similar:

http://villagevoice.com/specials/0531,letters,66491,7.html

What about what I pointed out? Doesn’t it make you question the pro-profiling types when they get it wrong?
Sister Toldjah says:

August 4, 2005 at 10:11 am

“And it doesn’t surprise me that tons of rural red staters are fine with telling NY how to go about protecting itself.”

Damn right I’m “fine” with it – what happens in NYC as it relates to fighting terrorism affects me too. Unless you think I should have been unaffected by 9-11 just because it happened in NYC (and DC, PA).

“What about what I pointed out? Doesn’t it make you question the pro-profiling types when they get it wrong?”

Nobody’s gotten anything wrong here. The simple fact of the matter is that a majority of terrorist attacks in the world right now are carried out by radical Muslims. There is no denying that, unless you want to continue to bury your head in the sand. If our intelligence agencies who I’ve no doubt are keeping an eye on mosques (for example) alert law enforcement to be on the lookout for a certain type of person (be they Asian, Jamaican, otherwise) then that’s exactly what they should do. Maybe one day you may thank them for it rather than rattling on about some Constitutional right you think is being violated.
actus says:

August 4, 2005 at 10:25 am

” Unless you think I should have been unaffected by 9-11 just because it happened in NYC (and DC, PA).”

Actus this is a warning – don’t come to my blog and tell me what I should and should not write and what I should or should not be concerned about. –ST

“The simple fact of the matter is that a majority of terrorist attacks in the world right now are carried out by radical Muslims.”

I was talking about the guy that mentioned Arabs. Not muslims. Arabs. And in the context of protecting from attacks that did not come from Arabs, but came from africans, asians and a jamaican.

Now, apparently, you have some way of picking out the muslim (arab, asian, african or even white) from looks, which you expect the cops to do.
Sister Toldjah says:

August 4, 2005 at 10:36 am

This is getting tiresome already. Go back and read what I read in my prior comment about how the police should go about profiling – I specifically mentioned that they very well could and should do it if our intelligence community has conducted surveillance and determined that a certain type of person(s) may be poised to strike. Please stop being intentionally naive.
actus says:

August 4, 2005 at 10:45 am

“Actus this is a warning – don’t come to my blog and tell me what I should and should not write and what I should or should not be concerned about. â€“ST”

Thanks for the redaction! I guess it is annoying to have others tell you how things should go about in your hometown.

“I specifically mentioned that they very well could and should do it if our intelligence community has conducted surveillance and determined that a certain type of person(s) may be poised to strike.”

Uh, the NYC subway searches should be informed by intelligence and surveillance? How? We just have a cop watching people go in. But I am happy you recognize that the idiot who just wants to search Arabs gets it wrong.

I say he can look for suspicious behavior. But “type”? What does that mean? Brown people can get by if dressed like a sikh, but with a smaller, islamic turban?
insomni says:

August 4, 2005 at 11:03 am

You’re right, Actus. Profiling individuals of a certain appearance would be far worse than scores of people being blown apart. Great logic. I’m all for “give me liberty or give me death,” but that’s taking it to an absurd extreme.

I’ve been searched at the airport many times and have no problem with it. I’m a white male and if the majority of worldwide terrorism was being carried out by people of that description, I would be glad to be profiled and searched — daily or even more, if necessary. It’s not that I have thick skin or infinite patience, I just want everything possible done to avoid more people being BLOWN UP.
Sister Toldjah says:

August 4, 2005 at 11:16 am

Actus: “Thanks for the redaction! I guess it is annoying to have others tell you how things should go about in your hometown.”

ST: If you find other people suggesting ways to keep others safe annoying, then I’m not quite sure why you even bother posting *ANYWHERE.* No doubt you’ve done similar here, and elsewhere in the blogosphere. Don’t get your boxers in a twist simply because people argue in favor of profiling in NY. There’s a larger issue at stake here, of course, that you’re deliberately ignoring and that is that the issue of profiling isn’t just limited to NYC but elsewhere as well so it’s obviously a subject worthy of debate. You’re not in favor of it, but no doubt it’s being done in places outside of NYC as well under the radar. I’m sure you would and have vocally disagreed with it. So it’s a bit hypocritical for you to act like people in other cities/states can’t comment on what goes on in NYC. I have friends in NYC and some of them don’t agree with my suggestions but they don’t have a problem with me HAVING AN OPINION about it. So come off the “don’t tell my city how to run itself” high horse. This is not just about NYC, but the American approach in general to profiling.

As to the rest of your comments, to quote Reagan, there you go again. You’re not only mischaracterizing my argument but being intentionally naive over what the argument really is about. I won’t continue to repeat myself to you. I don’t really have time to play this game with you today – or any day, in fact. If someone else who visits the blog and has oodles of patience wants to explain the argument to where you’ll understand it (and hopefully stop mischaracterizing it) they can be my guest.

You also seem to have this thing about getting the last word, so I’ll leave the last word to you as far as mine and your convo on this blog entry is concerned.
Sister Toldjah says:

August 4, 2005 at 11:18 am

Great points, insomni.
actus says:

August 4, 2005 at 11:37 am

“You’re not only mischaracterizing my argument but being intentionally naive over what the argument really is about. ”

How am I mischaracterizing?
insomni says:

August 4, 2005 at 12:02 pm

Thanks. Came in via your ad on Protein Wisdom. Nice blog!

Oh, and I smell a troll.
Hank Aaron says:

August 4, 2005 at 12:23 pm

:twisted:Um, so how’s about all of those Al-Qaeda types that were arrested wearing women’s clothing? Or possibly the fact that there are white, black, brown, yellow, red and also female suicide bombers. Mujehadin come from every major continent and even this country. Randomly searching bags is something that just makes our lives more difficult. Do they randomly search bags in London? And that is where the terrorists attacked. You see, “the global struggle against violent extremism” is about finding terrorists, killing them, and arresting them. It should also be about trying them, convicting them, and imprisoning them.

However, whenever you harden one target, they’re going to go after the one you ignore. Also, there have been only two Islamic terror attacks in the Homeland of the United States…EVER. Why do we think that all of a sudden hordes of scimitar waving Islamists are going to be blowing up bombs on our subway trains every day. How is an obvious police search going to stop a Bosnian-born Muslim dressed in regular U.S. clothing with an inconspicuous backpack. Goodness sakes, all we are doing is make people feel alienated, diverting law enforcement resources that could be gathering intelligence and making arrests and getting people hysterical about something that is far less common then getting electrocuted by a household appliance. Goodness sakes!
Sister Toldjah says:

August 4, 2005 at 12:29 pm

Insmomni: Gracias

Hank: I don’t think I’ve suggested ignoring other ‘targets’ – but when the majority of terrorist attacks that have occured throughout the world in the last 20 years have been carried out Muslim extremists, you’re defintely going to watch Muslims more closely – and you should.
Shooter says:

August 4, 2005 at 1:12 pm

This may be a solution;

1)search ALL the Muslims and all the Muslim look-alikes!

2) Search a few outtatown grannies when there are no Muslims around to search. Granny’ll be thrilled and have a story to tell back in Peoria at the senior’s club.

3) Search all the ghetto types too, you know, the ones with XXXL pants on a 28″ waist and a sideways baseball cap on . Das rite MFer, yo, you too Eminem!!! These guys should be searched anyway, 9/11 or no 9/11!

4) Check out an occasional NYU dorky math major, some Catholic School girls (hint: plaid uniforms) and, once a day, a 90 yr old overcoated Hasidic Rabbi.

Voila!!! Random searching!

To all: Please don’t use derogatory spellings for names of religious groups. This post was edited to change three such instances as it related to Muslims. I’d like to keep discussions here a bit more above board than that. Comments section on this is now closed. Any questions on this, please email me. Thanks. –ST

Comments are closed.