Chicago Transit Cops Start Up Their Own Security Theater, Will Start Randomly Swabbing Bags For Explosive Residue
from the what-can-we-do-that-would-be-WORSE-than-nothing,-CTA-asked dept
It appears Chicago wants to get in on New York City's racket -- steamrolling civil liberties because of a supposed terrorism nexus. For New York City, it's been every day since Sept. 11th, 2001, greatly aided and abetted by a nanny statist mayor and a police commissioner who'd never seen a personal freedom he didn't immediately dislike.
For Chicago, the terrorism connection isn't nearly as clear. In fact, there doesn't seem to be any justification for the deployment of random explosive-residue-swabbing checkpoints at public transit stations.
There is "no known terrorist threat" that prompted the new procedure slated to begin the week of Nov. 3, Nancy Lipman, Chicago police commander for public transportation, said Friday at a news conference announcing the initiative.OK... With that, um, cleared up, here's how the TSA-Lite random acts of intrusion will go down.
Chicago police say they will randomly select one rail station each day to set up the screening table outside the rail turnstiles during rush hour. Lipman said most of the stations will be downtown but other stops will be included as well.One rail station… out of dozens… selected randomly... with each search also being randomly generated.
A team of four to five officers will man the table, which will have two explosives testing machines.
Police will approach riders, whom they have randomly selected by picking a random number that morning, Lipman said.This randomly-selected person -- if carrying a bag -- will be asked to submit to an explosive residue test. The bag will not be opened. Unless it tests positive, in which case further impositions will be imposed.
For example, if police pick the number 10, they will ask the 10th person who enters the station, then the 20th and so on, Lipman said.
A positive test triggers a search request. Commuters can refuse but they won't be allowed to board their train and will be asked to leave the station. Almost "free to go," but not quite. Chicago transit cops will be free to perform less voluntary searches should they decide "probable cause" exists to do so. Given that a bag has just tested positive for explosives, that should be all the justification they need.
Police spokesman Marty Maloney calls this random act of security theater a "proactive, protective measure." Nearly everyone else, if given a few minutes to think about it, will call it "futile." Or "stupid."
The multiple layers of randomness are essential to preventing charges of discrimination or other civil liberties violations. (This is what makes DUI checkpoints and the TSA's "enhanced screening" Constitutional -- you either have to stop everybody or be truly random.) But this precaution also undermines the effectiveness of the effort. In fact, everything about this program borders on uselessness.
Anyone can refuse the initial test. They can also refuse to have their bags searched if they do test positive for explosive residue. Both actions will likely be viewed with suspicion but neither leads directly to detainment.
The city boasts more than 140 entry points, just for this mode of public transportation. Anyone who would rather avoid the "random checkpoint" will have plenty of options. The program checks a random entry for random people, rather than making any attempt to truly spot suspicious individuals or behavior. The Transit Authority takes great care to explain just how painless the process will be, what with limited checkpoints and no mandatory searches, but these words of comfort only highlight the fact that the screening system is almost entirely composed of security holes. The chances that this will actually prevent an attack are so close to zero as to be completely indistinguishable from doing nothing.
In exchange for its half-assed efforts, the city will likely net itself a few additional lawsuits, thanks to that inevitable byproduct of poorly-thought-out and poorly-implemented security theater programs: civil liberties' violations.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: chicago, privacy, random searches, security theater, terrorism, tsa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
If I was in such situation I'd simply walk to the next station and board there. Great security, no?
Good thing the Government is investing our hard earned money in things that really worth it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Seems that this measure is designed to produce the maximum hostility, and give the terrorists...errr...police an excuse to shoot up a station.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Countdown to them having a cow over the inevitable Checkpoint Swabbie phone apps.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This won't end well
So anyone refusing is likely to be arrested, detained, beaten, and yes, tortured.
Incidentally, I'm familiar with Chicago's transit system, as I've ridden various portions of it off-and-on for decades. Anyone who makes even a cursory analysis of its security vulnerabilities will quickly conclude that it's indefensible against any adversary with the tiniest clue. Which isn't surprising: it wasn't designed to be defensible. So while these idiots are busy harassing commuters (and not coincidentally, training them to give up their Constitutional rights), actual real live threats -- like muggers, who frequent the El -- can look forward to enhanced opportunities to "ply their trade".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This won't end well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This won't end well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mission creep will have nudie scanners next and since they've put so much money into the program, they'll have a problem with anyone that refuses to pass through.
Remind me to never take the subway in Chicago. That's another experience I can do without.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They'll have an app for that (soon)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: They'll have an app for that (soon)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Did EA help draft this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
>They announced what they call a new, unprecedented level of law enforcement at subway commuter and Amtrak train platforms and more random searches of baggage.
>“Commuters, citizens will see an increased presence,” Cuomo said. “That shouldn’t raise anxiety. If anything, that should provide a calming effect.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/cuomo-says-terror-threat-spurs-higher-security-p resence.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1 station ?
More stupidity from our nations finest. They must have gotten a grant they need to spend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 1 station ?
What utter nonsense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 1 station ?
Bomber turns up at station, sees police presence and large queue. Detonates bomb in queue - many casualties - including policemen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 1 station ?
I think the point we're all making that -- as a security tactic -- this is WORSE than nothing. It's so profoundly stupid that it has failed to survive 30 seconds of casual analysis from observers. No doubt someone who invested an entire day studying this could generate a catalog of failure long enough to occupy multiple pages.
Therefore we are left with two possible conclusions:
1. The Chicago police do not know that this is truly stupid. In that case, they are incompetent and those responsible for this fiasco should be publicly identified, publicly fired, and publicly blacklisted from police service for life: after all, we the public should not be paying people who lack baseline competence in their field.
2. The Chicago police do know that this is truly stupid. In that case, they are knowingly engaged in security theater in order to harass, intimidate, abuse, and frighten the very people that they are sworn to serve and protect. Once again, the people responsible should be publicly identified, publicly fired, and publicly blacklisted from police for life, as those who cannot fulfill their sworn obligations are unworthy to serve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: 1 station ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: 1 station ?
they got some free money/equipment to do this kind of shit, so they are doing this kind of shit to keep the free money/equipment flowing...
remember, ALL bureaucrats ALWAYS spend ALL their budget EVEN IF NOT NEEDED, to justify the increase for next year's budget...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 1 station ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 1 station ?
*boom*
Because unlike the UK during the IRA "troubles", in which authorities made a meticulous effort to relocate all trash containers away from crowded places like queues at train stations and airports, in the US there always seems to be a big trash can smack dab in the middle of the most crowded places.
As such extreme levels of idiocy can't be accidental, it's probable that the private security consults hired to "keep everyone safe" are intentionally leaving conspicuous chinks-in-the-armour while hoping for the next big terrorist attack, knowing that it will bring in more lucrative no-bid contracts for them to profit from.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- This is very similar to starting the sentence with:
I'm not a scientist, but ...
"Police will approach riders, whom they have randomly selected "
- Yeah, and this will not be based upon race.
"The multiple layers of randomness are essential to preventing charges of discrimination or other civil liberties violations."
Err - wut? ... lol, what a bunch of idiots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do the math
There are 1.7M riders per day, and 145 Stations (from http://www.transitchicago.com/about/facts.aspx).
Suppose they pick 10% of the people at random. That means they are selecting 10% * 0.69% = 0.069% of the people. So there's a 99.931% chance of not being selected. If there is one terrorist out of 1.7M *every day*, it will take 1005 days (2.75 years) of random testing before it even becomes more likely than not that the terrorist is caught. It would take 4343 days before you have a 95% chance of catching the terrorist on just one of those days.
This isn't about security. It's about allowing your PR team to *say* you are taking a "proactive, protective measure" without *actually* lying while saying it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do the math
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Do the math
Especially as any gun owner is likely to give positive results, especially if they take their bag to a firing range.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Remember this
It will happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Remember this
Remember kids, American Exceptionalism and all that stuff.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Remember this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Remember this
Toll roads? Already have those in some places; many existed before 9/11.
Agriculture Inspection Stations? Already have those in some places; many existed before 9/11.
Commercial Vehicle Inspection/Weigh Stations? Already have those; many existed before 9/11.
Border Patrol Checkpoints (miles away from the border)? Already have those; many existed before 9/11.
Airport Security Screening? Existed before 9/11; got worse after.
Security Screening to enter government buildings? Existed before 9/11.
In my above examples only one does not require everybody to stop.
Now if we're talking about having to stop more often...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More like random compliance with authority checks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More like random compliance with authority checks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
boiling frog
Just like all those INS highway checkpoints near the Mexican border, that were supposed to be set up to find illegal aliens. Since immigrant smugglers have for years completely avoided these checkpoints, they've been turned into drug and cash searches on surprised American travellers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
randomly random
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So, occasionally they'll "randomly" pick "1" or "2". Then it will be:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Meta question
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ok, well since I am being asked I can politely decline this intrusion to my day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
ie interfering with the work of police.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are police officers even required to swear an oath anymore? They seem to be doing whatever the hell they want with no regard to citizens constitutional rights
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's the randomness
How long will it take for the officers on the scene to think this randomness is too much work and start pulling over every 5th or 3rd or 2nd person? Heck, why not stop everyone and be done with the whole randomizing procedure. And who cares if people get delayed in the name of security (theater)- it's not like people are trying to get to work in rush hour.
But, like other people are saying, how long will it take for this to get out on Twitter and people start avoiding stations with checkpoints? I guess the police have done their job: if no one uses the station, then no terrorist will blow it up... or whatever it is they're trying to protect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That makes no fucking sense, unless its a preclude to get folks conditioned to permanant checkpoints
Were doing this for your protection, who cares if that guy over there going through that space were not checking "actually" has a bomb.......shhhhhh, thats not what this is about
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WOW
Can you prove any of those used the transit system? insted of just walking down the street and blowing up a 7/11 for the ATM?
HOW many transit officers is this going to take? MORE money out of your taxes?
If the CORPS dont take it, the STATE will tax you for it..\
BE SAFE, dont pay attention to the idiot next to you, LET the Gov do its job, keeping you safe...
Out of the war, how many TARGETS did we have? HOW many Civilians did we kill?
Are you REALLY safe?
NOW you are forcing those carrying BOMBS to have a quick kill button on the BOMB.
But REALLY...WHERE would be a good place for a bomb?
At a marathon, ending when 90% of the people have GONE HOME?
Look at the other countries, that HAD BOMBINGS..
A Subway during NOON to RUSH HOUR would be a GREAT spot..
Why hasnt it happened already? ITS A BIG EASY TARGET.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"This is what makes... the TSA's 'enhanced screening' Constitutional"
"We think the search for the sole purpose of discovering weapons and preventing air piracy, and not for the purpose of discovering weapons and precriminal events, fully justified the minimal invasion of personal privacy by magnetometer. [...] When the high metal indication of the magnetometer was not satisfactorily explained by Epperson, the subsequent physical "frisk" of his jacket was entirely justifiable and reasonable under Terry." United States of America, Appellee, v. Cecil Kenton Epperson, Appellant., 454 F.2d 769 (4th Cir. 1972)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For example, if police pick the number 10, they will ask the 10th person who enters the station, then the 20th and so on, Lipman said."
Aww, shoot. The RNG picked 1 today.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid, stupid, stupid, ...
If your station wasn't picked, walk by city hall and pummel it. Perhaps when the steps of city hall are bleeding red with a river of rotten tomatos, they might re-think this ridiculous, worthless intrusion into the lives of those paying their salaries.
Secondly, dust your bags with a bit of nitrogen fertilizer. Overload the machines with false positives.
Can you imagine the lineups when every second person in line is to be checked? "Hello boss? I'm not going to make it into work today."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stupid, stupid, stupid, ...
I'll be rich! Thanks Chicago. Ah, the land of the free, capitalism's great!1!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
decimation in its classical sense
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chicago Searches
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chilled speech
I find I can't bring myself to do it...at least not with a name in the blank: There's simply too much chance some authoritarian goon would take it as a threat; and if so, I'd find myself under investigation or arrest.
It's sad that our authorities have so little respect for Rights that we must restrain ourselves from making even the most mundane jokes, to avoid official attention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]