Your papers, please. Part 3-railway ID checks

Status
Not open for further replies.

fjolnirsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Messages
1,746
Location
Oregon, in the Willamette Valley
MBTA set to begin passenger ID stops
Effort part of national rail security program
By Mac Daniel, Globe Staff | May 22, 2004

MBTA transit police confirmed yesterday they will begin stopping passengers for identification checks at various T locations, apparently as part of new national rail security measures following the deadly terrorist train bombings in Spain.

Although officials would release few details about the initiative, the identity checks will mark the first time local rail and subway passengers will be asked to produce identification and be questioned about their activities.

Officers have been training for the security checks since May 11, transit officials said. MBTA Police Deputy Chief John Martino confirmed via e-mail yesterday that officers have been training with State Police at South Station this week.

MBTA spokesman Joe Pesaturo said the State Police involved in the training were from Troop F at Logan International Airport, where such identification checks have been taking place since about a year after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Pesaturo wouldn't say where or when the identification stops would take place, or how long they would last.

"The training is part of the MBTA's overall plan for enhancing safety and security for the hundreds of thousands of people who use our system every day," Pesaturo wrote in the e-mail. "Law enforcement personnel are being trained to detect whether a person's or persons' actions are an indication of any level of risk or threat to the transit system . . . and to then take appropriate steps based on the observed behavior.

"If the MBTA did not do everything it can to protect transit users, it would be a dereliction of our duties and responsibilities as public servants," he added.

Ann Davis, Northeast regional spokeswoman for the federal Transportation Security Administration, refused to confirm that T's ID checks are part of a new national rail security program announced Thursday by federal officials. Those new security initiatives are scheduled to start tomorrow, in response to terrorist train bombings in Madrid that killed 191 and injured 2,000.

"We don't want to map out for potential terrorists how we intend to protect the rails," she said.

Concerns about threats to the nation's rail system have risen since ABC News reported a pattern of suspicious activities along the rail corridor between Washington, D.C., and New York. The report said New Jersey's attorney general is investigating at least seven instances in the last week of suspected surveillance along the New Jersey Transit commuter lines leading into Philadelphia, Trenton, and New York.

FBI agents in Philadelphia are also investigating the discovery of an infrared sensor concealed along the track bed of a Southeast Pennsylvania Transportation Authority rail line.

The State Police officers based at Logan who are instructing T police have been trained in "behavior pattern recognition" in order to identify potential terrorists.

According to past interviews with Logan's primary security consultant, Rafi Ron, former head of security at Ben-Gurion Airport in Israel, such a program helps avoid accusations of racial profiling and is based on the behavior of those stopped. Logan was the first American airport at which the method was used.

Martino said "we do not racially profile and do not consider that someone is suspicious because they appear to be Middle Eastern or that they are not suspicious if they don't appear to be."

The expansion of identity checks to rail and subway passengers has raised concerns among civil rights advocates about what is gained through such stops and whether they are truly random.

Last October, State Police at Logan stopped Lylburn King Downing, the national coordinator of the American Civil Liberties Union's Campaign Against Racial Profiling -- and an African-American -- who was ordered out of the airport after he refused to answer an officer's questions during an identification check.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts has since sought more information about the policies of Massachusetts Port Authority and State Police governing such searches, but ACLU officials say they have had little cooperation from either agency.

"About a year ago they admitted they were using training based on an Israeli security model of behavioral profiling or selection which they declined to either explain or to otherwise amplify what it means," said John Reinstein, legal director for the ACLU of Massachusetts. "We asked for the records and they said that's no longer a public record because anything that has to do with security is no longer a public record."

© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.

Hmm. Random Id checks for citizens going about their business. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside..... :rolleyes: :barf:
 
img_aus02.jpg




I refuse to ride in or fly in any public conveyance because of things like this. How long before we have random stops on the highways?
 
What CoolHandLuke says. We're becoming more like the Soviet Union. I've heard of railroad buffs who had their film confiscated for taking pictures of trains. Geez. To think there are several magazines devoted to trains and the interest in trains spans well over a century. Now pursuing our hobbies (trains, planes & buses & ships) will be cause for police investigation.:rolleyes:
 
CoolHandLuke:

Random Highway Stops? I can't belive that you hadn't heard that this is already in practice. Usually not for terrorism, but the WOD or for DUI, etc. Different excuse, same result.
 
Last edited:
Good thing we don't live in a police state, or random ID checkpoints might be used improperly.

atek3 (once again, w/ the sarcasm)
 
Amendment IV
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.
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.
'nuff said.
 
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.
And your suggestion for the "something" we should do is what, exactly? (And I mean that as a serious question, not as dig. I've been pondering that question for quite some time without any useful insights.)
 
I have refused to fly for several years, especially since 9/11, becuase of these violations of rights. The last public conveyance trip I took was on Amtrak to San Francisco for a business conference. Looks like that is soon to not be an option.

If enough people would refuse to use the system, they would be forced by economics to make changes. There are many things that could be done, for a lot less money, that would add some real security to the transprotation system.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
 
I don't have an answer: Which is better, endure some possible violation of a Constitutional right and not have your train blow up, or not have such violation but only get partway to your destination?

Now, I won't fly, but it's because I believe that the methodology of the "security checks" are done in an insulting manner and are not efficacious. Bomb checks, okay; excitement over "possible weapon" nokay.

Art
 
Which is better, endure some possible violation of a Constitutional right and not have your train blow up
If random ID checks would help to prevent that, then it might make sense. However, all one has to do is look at the many many miles of open railroad track. Why get on a train, when you can plant a bomb on the tracks.
This is nothing more than feelgood legislation.
Much like the other things we endure in the name of "security".
I don't fly, and now I guess I won't be taking trains, either.:mad: :cuss: :banghead:

Edited to add: Furthermore, citizens are not(so far as I know) required to carry ID when on daily business. Oops, I guess we are now.:rolleyes: :cuss:
 
The terrorist have won this round. Are we so blind that we cannot see that the govt. has done to us what the terrorists only hinted at.

I hope the airlines, especially go broke. An armed society would cure this hijacking problem. There is no cure for the bombing.

The govt. making us "show them our papers" isn't going to help.
 
Here's the long and short of it. I work for U.P.R.R. and knowing them, if they have to put out any money for it, there isn't anyway it's going to happen. The Unions have been fighting to get some kind of security in place since 9/11 and the recent bombings in Spain. They are just now starting to get people to listen to what they are saying.

The other way to look at it is, there's to much rail out there to secure and that's another big factor. Most of the big RR's talk the talk for the Gov's benefit but could care less about security on the rails. Now if it were the HQ buildings being threatened, they would park locomotives around them to protect themselves.
 
Funny thing reading about people who are willing to limit freedom for their personal safety.

I forgot to read the part about where everyone is guaranteed to be safe in life.

Isn't that why almost all of us carry guns?

Does all the id checks in Israel stop the bombings?

Living in a free society comes with a risk.

One of those risks is not being asked "may I see your papers".

Any support of anything that directs us to a path of limited freedoms in exchange for safety needs to go back and re-read the founding documents including all the writings that go along with them.

As has been stated, peaceful refusal to paticipate in anything that supports these freedom limiting methods is a good place to start.
 
And your suggestion for the "something" we should do is what, exactly?
Consult with enthusiastically sympathetic lawyer.
Buy a plane ticket.
Begin normal boarding procedure.
When asked to submit to a search, demand a warrant.
No warrant, no search, no flight.
Obtain written explaination of refusal.
Sue.
Get lots of like-minded people to do likewise.

You can book a round-trip flight for under $100 (the least of your costs in this case), timed for your convenience to press the issue (face it: you won't be getting on the plane; no need to interrupt a must-travel flight).

The key is to get a lot of people to do the same.

So long as nobody says "follow the Constitution, feds!" this BS will continue.
 
Obtain written explaination of refusal.
I'm thinking that they're likely not to give you a written expaination, so it might be handy to bring a witness with you.

ctdonath, I think your approach is sound. But, I just don't see a Supreme Court that went for "implied consent" upholding the Constitution here. I think the process they're going to go through is something like, "Damn! One of those 9/11 planes damn near took us out! We're not going to let that happen again." And then they'll work a variation on implied consent here. ("Air travel isn't a constitutionally-protected right, it's a privilege...")
 
In my last post, I think I stumbled upon a major part of the problem--we have a Supreme Court that doesn't uphold the Constitution. (I already knew that, but, as they'd say in my math classes, it's interesting that it "just fell out of the equations.")

Clearly, what we need to do is get judges into the courts who will uphold the Constitution. And I think that that's an education process--bringing enough people to the awareness of what the Constitution says, and why it says it, that we begin again to uphold the Constitution.

But with our schools teaching that the Constitution was written by rich white men to oppress the masses, that's to really, really big assignment, and I don't even know how to even start on it in a meaningful way.

(And yes, my son really did have a teacher who's teaching that--that wasn't hyperbole.)
 
The problem with your plan is that planes are not government property -- they are owned by private companies. If you want to get on them, you've gotta play by their rules. No warrants necessary, you sign your rights away by buying a ticket.
 
The problem with your plan is that planes are not government property -- they are owned by private companies. If you want to get on them, you've gotta play by their rules. No warrants necessary, you sign your rights away by buying a ticket.

If it were the private companies doing this, fine. I fly a different airline. But it isn't. It is a search mandated by the US government. It is a violation of the 4th amendment to force warrantless searches upon citizens engaged in LEGAL , law abiding business. Flying, like driving is a privilege (although it could be argued that free movement in a manner commonly used in this day and age falls under"pursuit of happiness"), but it is still legal business which shows no criminal intent.
 
Hmmm. Having been a Locomotive Engineer for about 25 years, (till my back went south on me), I can say with certainty that checking ID's won't make much difference to those that would cause mayhem on our nation's rail system.

I'm not going to say specifically, but, there's a whole lot of nasty things being transported via rail over literally thousands of miles of territory that could be tampered with in such a way as to wreak havoc on large metropolitan centers. For example, ever heard of hydrocyanic acid? Nasty stuff...

This ID thing is just one more way to get into our lives and look like the .gov is doing something proactive to prevent the evildoers from carrying out their nefarious ends.
 
Your papers, please.

This is nothing more than feelgood legislation.

No, it's not. It's much more than that - it's designed to get us all used to be stopped, asked to produce id, searched, and detained anytime the authorities want. It's clever conditioning - and it's being used throughout every strata of our society. You want to go somewhere? You want to attend a sporting event? You want to attend school? Get used to it, this is going to be with us for a long time - and I'm predicting it will get much worse long before it ever gets better. There is a whole generation of kids coming out of public school now that are used to these jack booted invasions of privacy. If you think they'll object when they rachet up the next level, you're wrong.

I remember very well when I lived in Switzerland in the 80's - and I'd be riding my bike thru the park in the morning and a kid with a machine pistol slung around his neck would stop me, inspect my bike (bell and brakes) and check my Ausweis (outside white) papers, which I was always required to have on my person or I'd get a trip to the local police station. I found such stops very offensive and was happy to return to the US where such things were unheard of. Step forward 15 years and we've allowed the same crap to be implemented here.
 
Which is better, endure some possible violation of a Constitutional right and not have your train blow up, or not have such violation but only get partway to your destination?
By what right do I have the right to abrogate the rights of others for my own personal safety?
 
It will take guts; but when they ask for your ID simply say "I'm sorry, but I'm from America and we don't do that there; but thanks for asking." Then turn on your heel and walk away.
 
Which is better, endure some possible violation of a Constitutional right and not have your train blow up, or not have such violation but only get partway to your destination?
Explain how having proper ID will "not have your train blow up".

It's a non-sequitor, just like the idea that pistol permits stop crime.
 
I'm probably going to take the MBTA into Boston for a college course. If I'm asked to show ID while riding it I'll either say No or I don't have any. Not sure which yet. Being rousted by a cop could be unpleasant but it beats surfdom.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top