I do not consent to being searched

I hate to say this, but having grown up in DC before I came to Philly, I don't object to having my bags searched. It's okay to be principled, but I really would rather be safe. I don't have anything to hide from the police, so I'm perfectly fine with their letting me prove it. If I have to be slightly inconvenienced so that the chance of my hometown, and my new home town, getting blown up by terrorists is decreased, I'll take it.

And I've never voted for a Republican in my life, nor do I intend to for quite some time.

What worries me is how far they will take this measure. If you don't consent, you're almost 100% likely to be taken downtown for questioning which will really mess up your day. Then they start a file on you and the ball just keeps bouncing.

I'm worried about them finding other stuff in bags. Can they arrest you if you don't have a bomb in your bag? What if you have a dime bag? What if they find a stun gun you use for protection? Or a butterfly knife? Are you a terrorist then? Will this just be extended indefinitely as we are nearing a police state under martial law?

It's where lawmakers will take this that worries me. Sure, I'd like for them to make the streets safer, but how obtrusive must they be? And I'm quite sure they're racially profiling here. That 50 year old white guy in a pin striped suit with a leather attaché sure as hell isn't gonna get searched.

If they're smart, they do search him, just to prove the point. And if he protests, they cart him off downtown and make an example of him and how he's not above anything.

And yes, I realize that's a big if.

Albert,

I can understand your concerns. Anyone who looks vaguely Middle Eastern is going to be viewed with suspicion, by others in line, if not by those doing the searching. I also think that searchers, at least on the airlines, do randomly tag people. My bags are searched about every other time I fly and, as I have been told repeatedly, I look like a schoolmarm (as a kid in summer camp I was voted "most likely to become an English teacher").

I hear you, W.E., but I'm not sure that this is a particularly effective way to fight terrorism.

I'd argue that we'd be much better off putting money into random searches of containers coming off of America's ports.

Oh, I agree with that, but I don't think the two are mutually exclusive in the least. Look at all the money the TSA is wasting trying to secure airports. They've got money they aren't even spending because they don't want to focus on seaports or subway systems.

Oh wait, I forgot. The people who control the money don't use seaports or subway systems.

Good point about the lack of mutual exclusivity, W.E.

This issue gets down to some of the discussions that occurred after 9/11 -- with some people decrying profiling, and others pointing to Israel's security measures to show that in this day and age, profiling is a necessity.

It's interesting to note that according to the Times, NY subway riders aren't complaining . . . yet. Guess they didn't talk to Majikthise.

I wonder if you're on a list now. From what I've read and seen, it's nearly impossible to get off those lists. If Ted Kennedy has a hard time getting off the list, the rest of us are completely fucked if we get on them. I've read an article in the NY Times on how frequent fliers are now changing how they dress because of being searched so often. Shoes with no laces, no belts, t-shirts, no bulky jackets...