Boston...

I heard on the news this morning that a very controversial decision was made in Boston.

Apparently during the convention police are going to be randomly searching people's personal belongings...

What does everything think of this?

ETA: There is supposed to be a system in place where they go by a count or something. (As opposed to profilng-which they are supposedly not encouraged to do...)I guess people feel this allows for potential abuse...

oooh, good call, we haven't had a little controversy on here for a while

i'll start

i, for one, am all for it

this was in today's daily news

New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
Cops rip judge: 'It's giving an open door to terrorists'
BY ROBERT GEARTY and MICHELE McPHEE
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Tuesday, July 20th, 2004

NYPD cops blasted a federal judge's ruling aimed at stopping them from searching demonstrators' bags outside the Republican National Convention, saying the decision gives 'an open door to terrorists.'
Manhattan Federal Judge Robert Sweet's decision - made public yesterday - prohibits blanket searches of bulky bags and backpacks in the absence of a 'specific threat.'

'In this day and age of terrorism, it's an extremely dangerous step in a very dangerous time in New York City,' said an outraged Michael Palladino, president of the Detectives Endowment Association.

'It's giving an open door to terrorists, and further handcuffing police at a time that they should be given a little bit more latitude,' Palladino said. He said he plans to urge Mayor Bloomberg to appeal the ruling.

Sweet's decision also limits how many streets the NYPD can close around Madison Square Garden, and prohibits cops from penning protesters behind metal barricades.

The ruling does not prevent the use of hand-held metal-detecting wands around the perimeter of the convention.

Sweet wrote that his ruling is an attempt to 'define a resolution which can serve to encourage free expression in a secure society.'

He described the preventive measure by police as an 'invasion of personal privacy.'

Christopher Dunn, an attorney for the New York Civil Liberties Union, called it a 'historic victory.'

But NYPD officials interpreted it another way - insisting their plan to handle protesters outside the convention would not be greatly affected by the ruling.

They noted that Sweet conceded that blanket bag searches could occur on a case-by-case basis if police officials could demonstrate there was a specific danger to public safety.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the NYPD had frequently banned bags from large public gatherings or searched backpacks for explosives.

'The court endorsed policies that Police Commissioner [Raymond] Kelly had already put into practice. It also articulated that threat is a reason to justify searches in certain instances,' NYPD Deputy Commissioner of Public Information Paul Browne said in a statement yesterday.

'The decision does not cause the Police Department to change any plans or tactics for safeguarding the Republican National Convention or the demonstrations associated with it. In effect, the court accepted existing department practices as reasonable and rational.'

Those practices were adopted after a 2003 anti-war rally ended with several cops being injured, and 240 demonstrators arrested.

Patrolmen's Benevolent Association President Pat Lynch declined comment on the ruling.

I also am all for it ... search away, I have nothing to hide. New York, however, ruled that the police cannot do this during the convention here ... I think it's a BIG MISTAKE, HUGE

---

Posted by Jan05Bride

BIG MISTAKE, HUGE

---

Okay Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman...

---

Posted by BMD'sPeanut

---

Posted by Jan05Bride

BIG MISTAKE, HUGE

---

Okay Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman...

---

Thought you'd pick up on that

exactly

they way i look at it, if they want to do something, they will and the best security system can't stop anyone.

---

Posted by 121502

If we had good enough security to begin with in this country, they wouldn't need to do this. JMO.

---

Like what?

I just mean better intelligence and what not. I don't know. If you're that concerned about a big convention like that being a terror threat, then don't have such a big one in a city. Do it in a friggin warehouse in the middle of a field. I know, I know, over-simplified, but I don't think they really care all too much about our safety. Maybe I am just a pessimist in regards to this country and how it's run.

---

Posted by Jan05Bride

I also am all for it ... search away, I have nothing to hide. New York, however, ruled that the police cannot do this during the convention here ... I think it's a BIG MISTAKE, HUGE

---

i agree, it's a cr@ppy sacrifice, but if it can save lives of people doing their everyday things in NY, then it is a worthy sacrifice.

---

Posted by 121502

I just mean better intelligence and what not. I don't know. If you're that concerned about a big convention like that being a terror threat, then don't have such a big one in a city. Do it in a friggin warehouse in the middle of a field. I know, I know, over-simplified, but I don't think they really care all too much about our safety. Maybe I am just a pessimist in regards to this country and how it's run.

---

this is true -- why would you have a huge political conference in new york of all places

---

Posted by don424



this is true -- why would you have a huge political conference in new york of all places

---

Maybe it's supposed to be like: 'Hey, terrorists, we're not scared!!' but the bad people don't give a crap anyway...They're probably all laughing at us.

---

Posted by don424

if the government thinks that NY isn't scared, they should speak for themselves and leave us out of it

---

Amen!!! Preach on, brother

---

Posted by HearzBellz

---

Posted by don424

if the government thinks that NY isn't scared, they should speak for themselves and leave us out of it

---

Amen!!! Preach on, brother

---

I certainly don't disagree...If I gave in to all these fears, I'd probably never leave the house.