I'm just about fed up.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by idea_hamster, Jul 26, 2005.

  1. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #1
    I'm having a real problem with the level of idiocy in the US -- especially the targeting of Sikhs by people who are afraid of "terrorists."

    The fact that people hold ethnic stereotypes and racist views is bad, but they fact that they are so ignorant that they can't even get their racist stereotyping right is simply beyond my ability to comprehend.

    It seems that four years of stupidity hasn't taught these fools anything at all.
     
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #2
    i submit that the bush administration has been all about fostering fear. this is a natural fallout.
     
  3. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #3
    I will second that emotion. What is the terror threat color at the moment?
     
  4. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #4
    i think it's your screen name. :)

    and it will NEVER drop below that under this president.

    here's the page that you can check in case you are curious in the future

    link
     
  5. idea_hamster thread starter macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #5
    You know, I'd be happy to lay this whole thing in W.'s lap, but it's not that simple.

    This is about Americans having absolutely no sense of what goes on outside the US and no understanding of other cultures/ethnicities/religions/etc.

    I mean, you can be scared ******** about terrorism and assume that all Arabs are possible terrorists and think that it's just fine to identify Arabs by their head-dress that is unusual in the US and still not have any trouble with Sikhs.

    Oh, and here in NYC, the Alert Level is still Orange, I think -- justification for random bag checks on the subway. How effective is that going to be? Not.
     
  6. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #6
    that is also true. but i look to any president for leadership, and in terms of acting sensibly, bush has utterly failed.

    but by no means am i letting the idiot public off the hook.
     
  7. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #7
    especially since the idiot public chose him as their leader... ahh. still mindboggling
     
  8. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #8
    nuf said
     
  9. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
  10. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #10
    I agree that random bag checks are practically useless. If, however, you accept the premise that there's reason to be concerned about the possibility of a terrorist attack on the subway, what would be a more effective way to prevent that from happening? In other words, what could they do instead of random bag checks?
     
  11. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #11
    good question lyle...

    i'd probably start with looking at the roots of terrorism (ie what drives people to want to kill americans/allies). that's being glossed over far too much, though blair did at least mention it in a speech or two.

    for more hands on... i'm not really sure. i think heightened awareness is fine, but like on the metro here in dc you hear about clumps of 3-4 cops together on a single car of a train, talking on cell phones and stuff... not spreading out for effectiveness and truly searching and being aware. citizens of course need to be aware too, without being paranoid of course. tough balance i'll admit.

    but reworking the current security in a more effective way is a good start i'd say.
     
  12. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #12
    I don't disagree that we need to understand why it's happening, but that's not going to prevent anything from happening in the short term. I'm asking, what should NYC police do today to try to prevent a terrorist attack on the subway system? Should they be doing something instead of random bag searches, or in addition to random bag searches, or should they just not do anything?

    The tour bus operator in the linked story was practicing "heightened awareness". For whatever reason, he sensed that the Sikh men posed a threat and he reported this to the police. If he gets to keep his job, it's a safe bet that the next time he senses a threat like that he'll keep his mouth shut.

    I don't know what that means. Do you have anything specific in mind?
     
  13. xsedrinam macrumors 601

    xsedrinam

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    #13
    Root causes are usually ALWAYS worth considering and looking to. I met the first part of this comment with enthusiasm until it stopped far too short [americans/allies] in its scope. Why any nation would want to eradicate and erase another nation state from the planet needs mentioning, though "allies" might refer to Israel and/or Palestine. Also a good word study on the derivation of "zeal" vs. "zealout" would be well invested time.
    X
     
  14. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #14
    Our transportation system was never designed to be as secure as it is now required to be. Unless we go back to square one there just isn't much the NYPD can do other than being vigilant. Sure random searches provide a modicum of security, but it's only perhaps a 5 on a 100 point scale.

    Stopping a suicide bomber is tough, and relies entirely too much on luck to be reliable.

    And of course these NYPDs are probably on time-and-a-half pay to cover the increased demand.
     
  15. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #15
    I figured the random bag checks in NYC were more psychological warfare. Win the people's hearts and minds, as well as put 'fear' into a suspect. Maybe they'll catch a pot dealer or something. Hahahaa! I slay me!
     
  16. Applespider macrumors G4

    Applespider

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Location:
    looking through rose-tinted spectacles...
    #16
    Mass transit can never be very secure since its main purpose is to move around lots of people in as short a time as possible. This means that stations are designed to have multiple entrances/exits to ticket halls. It's also generally short of space so there's little room to queue for security checks etc.

    Random checks might not do much - but I guess, as in London, they're focusing on the large bags rather than every commuter's briefcase.
     
  17. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #17
    fair enough, wasn't attacking you just pointing it out because i don't think it can be stressed enough, and certainly isn't by our gov't.

    i'm not sure that the tour bus operator overreacted necessarily. 1. i'm not sure how i feel in general about it (it's something new to me so i'm still forming my opinion) and 2. i don't know the full story and couldn't put myself in his shoes necessarily. as opposed to something like the london shooting where i think 8 bullets was an overreaction.

    what i meant about reworking the security we do have already was just rehashing what i said about how sometimes security forces are clumped together and not necessarily being vigilant themselves.

    and i think with most people it's all too often an all or nothing. for instance, i talked to someone who was in the empire state building a few weeks after the world trade center attacks (probably a few weeks after it reopened) and there was a bag in the corner of the ticket room or something. they watched as it was unattended for several minutes, and then notified a security officer. the officer told them that people leave stuff all the time and it's not a big deal.... the other extreme would be of course to evacuate the building, get big press, etc... but why not have security quietly see if it's suspicious (beyond just being unattended), and then go from there. i realize it's not always possible to act so deliberately, but i guess the point is that there is a reaction between overly paranoid, shooting first and asking questions later, and simply looking the other way..

    and maybe the bus incident in NYC is a good example of that. though how the police may have treated the people is a separate issue i think.


    hah. long winded, but i hope that clarified my thoughts a bit.
     
  18. Royal Pineapple macrumors 65816

    Royal Pineapple

    #18
    two words
    BOMB DOGS
    if the dog suspects someone, search their bag. if the dog ignores someone let them get on the bus/train/plane/matter-transporter/whatever
    problem solved

    i realize that the dogs would not be 100% effective in stopping bombs form getting onboard, and they are difficult to train and implement, but they inconvenience the passengers the least.
     
  19. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #19
    protecting ourselves is an impossible task. the end result will either be a paranoid police state or a complete rethinking of foreign policy. i hope for the latter, and the sooner, the better.

    in the meantime, increased fear and additional attacks will serve as catalyst for the end result, whatever it is.

    if the goal of terrorism is to get the US to fearspend its way into poverty, they've got a good start.

    here is just one recent instance of chicago shutting down part of its train service for a suspicious package. how much does it cost each time someone forgets something in a public place? both in terms of additional manpower and worktime lost? we're doomed.
     
  20. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #20
    No, dogs are AFAIK, the most reliable method of locating hidden explosives. Unfortunately they are also expensive, some estimates I've seen say about $25,000 per dog/handler team in training costs. Also dogs can only work for short periods of time, although I did read of one group that was working to try to have one handler with 4 or 5 dogs that could be rotated through a shift. Of course that drives the cost over $100K.
     
  21. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #21
    So now that the terrorists have proven that they are willing and capable of attacking us, all it takes is a credible threat (or an approaching DNC convention :eek: ) to make us throw hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars down the toilet. For each incident!

    And the right wing is so proud of Reagan for forcing the Soviets to spend themselves into collapse. 'Oh what a wise strategy that was' they say, seemingly oblivious to the position they have now put us in...
     
  22. idea_hamster thread starter macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #22
    Granted, there aren't lots of options. I have to admit that, while it may look overly martial, bomb dog teams would be my favored response.

    Of course, I'd have to admit that these teams are prohibitively expensive. After all, I think that there are about the same number of subway stops in NYC as there are in the rest of the United States combined -- a surveillance nightmare.

    Further, I'll grant that the "best" should not be the enemy of the "good," i.e., we should not refuse to take some steps simply because they're not the best of all possible worlds. While I'm sensitive to civil liberties issues, I'd say that the Patriot Act is a far greater threat than random bag searches. Of course, I'd be even happier with the random bag checks if the cops didn't enforce laws that are not the source of the check. Which is to say, if they do catch someone with some weed or something, they should confiscate it and let the person go, since their ostensible rationale is to prevent violent terrorism.

    That said, I stand by my original complaint that Americans seem to be displaying an unpleasant mix of ignorance and [you choose: racial profiling/racism].
     
  23. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #23
    of course, we could resort to other mine sniffers. plenty of rats in the city...
     
  24. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #24
    Think of the people in charge. How would they best benefit? It certainly isn't rethinking our foreign policies, nor giving up the power we give them to give the illusion of safety. Plus, we're Americans. We don't want real solutions if it actually takes effort. We're too busy for that. We want quick fixes that don't actually do anything. We look the other way when officials are too busy giving their friends kickbacks and promoting people who don't deserve promotion while the people who really know what's going on go unheard. Or worse, discredited, despite being correct.

    Face it kids, the terrorists won a long time ago. We're just too scared to realize it. Think about that one for a minute.
     

Share This Page