MSNBC: Would you be willing to be searched? (poll)

[me b zola]

Safety vs Privacy: Would you be willing to be searched?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/


* 5368 responses

Yes...68%

No....32%


We really need to be heard on this. Don't forget to send your e-mails on your thoughts on the question of the day:)

[SeveneightyWhoa]

1. How about a third option..

C) Do I have a f*cking choice?

[sui generis]

2. It depends - public transportation, we already are

but driving down the highway, hell fucking no. Walking down the sidewalk, absolutely not.

[babylonsister]

3. Depends on the circumstances. I

was in Tel Aviv about 8 years ago and in certain shopping areas EVERY package, purse, bag, etc. was searched. This was controlled and, I thought, necessary. But randomly on the subway doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

[KG]

4. speaks volumes about our society

* 5368 responses

Yes...68%

No....32%


a frightened people willing to give up their civil rights for some phantasm called 'security'

home of the brave, my ass.

[neweurope]

5. Land of the free, my ass.

-------------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush tp The Hague!

[Goldmund]

8. Don't jump to conclusions so fast

That doesn't mean that one LIKES being searched or SUPPORTS being searched.

I fucking HATE it and I think it's unconstitutional.

But next time I'm taking the subway, I'll have no choice but to be searched (if they pick me). I answered "No" in the poll, but technically speaking, it's a lie -- I need to get places and what the fuck else am I gonna do? I'll make a few comments to the cop, but that's it.

[SoCalDem]

6. There won't be a choice..

Just like now.. If you want to fly, you submit..otherwise you drive..Those are the only choices

[derby378]

7. Still 68-32 for searches - where are the votes?!?

Keep 'em coming!!

[Carni]

17. I just noticed the number of votes hasn;t changed either!

Now presumably everyone else on this string has voted but the grand total of votes hasn't changed? How the hell does THAT work?

[MissMarple]

9. Well, who would be doing the searching?

:evilgrin:

Actually, it depends. Security looked into handbags at my son's high school graduation. I held mine wide open and the guard thanked me. Gee, no tampons or anything. :shrug:

[derby378]

31. You see, that's the problem right there

As a nation, we are being conditioned to accept security guards searching us at high school graduations. The Fear is taking hold.

[Ian David]

10. Done. 68% Yes, 32% No

Safety vs Privacy: Would you be willing to be searched?
* 5730 responses

Yes
68%

No
32%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434

In Boston, they're having random searches, too.

Your options are to either be searched or leave.

So, maybe you can leave, wait 5 minutes, and come back while the cop is busy randomly searching someone else.

[Village Idiot]

11. BAAAA...BAAAAAA..... BAAAAAAAAAAAAA....

I can't believe that a MAJORITY of people would allow the abrogation of their 4th Amendment rights!!!

How utterly ludicrous! Has the world gone MAD???

[AX10]

18. That would also include people who call themsevles "liberals".

America is screwed. :argh:

[Chewy_dKos]

20. well....

I'm probably just about as liberal as most of you here, and I absolutely cannot stand GWB,but what I don't get is this. Everyone here bithes that Bush isn't doing anything really to keep us safe. Then if a token effort is made, then you bitch that your civil liberties are being taken away....well, you cant have it both ways....which way do you want it?

[LSK]

28. i would want my liberties and

I would want a government that doesnt enrage terrorists by invading countries and I would want leaders who dont fuck our intelligence agencies.


Is that too much to ask?

[me b zola]

30. Well Chewy

Not everyone here is against the illegal random searches. Thanks for the broad brush.

I cannot speak for others who, like me, are opposed to giving up our civil liberties but I can say that willingly forfeiting your civil rights does not increase your safety. Here is a good thread discussing the issue:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4169620&mesg_id=4169620


If the cheney administration were serious about keeping us safe from "terra", they would demand that the nuclear & chemical industries increase their security. The National Guard would not be deployed getting blown up half way around the world in an illegal war.
The looting of our National Treasury by the cheney administration has left us very vulnerable to hostile foreign interest. And finally, cheney and the cabal playing patty-cake with the same people they tell us we should be terrified of tells me they are all FOS.


The people, IMO, that we should fear are the neo-cons. I will not willing handover my civil liberties because they tell me that they want to make me safe.

[JTHC]

29. Nope

How is that an abrogation of 4th Amendment rights if you consent to a search?

My answer is it would depend on how important it was for me to take the subway at that particular instant. Same with flying. I hate going through security at airports, but sometimes it's too far to drive. If I have to be somewhere that's too far to walk, I would consent to a search to get on the subway.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. "Ihre Papiere gefallen uns müssen Ihre Beutel kontrollieren"

It's soooo much clearer in the original language.

[LibinMo]

13. Done

* 5770 responses
Yes 68% No 32%

[earth mom]

14. Hell no! And I have nothing to hide-nothing!

Years ago, in a restaurant I worked in, the owner installed a camera in the service bar area where we servers went to get cocktails for our diners. It annoyed the hell out of me then and I even got a little stamp that said "under scrutiny" and stamped it on papers posted on the bulletin board located back there. Most servers who hadn't worked there very long didn't care, but I was a long term employee and was highly insulted especially in light of the fact that I had witnessed several long time employees stealing meals for themselves and giving friends free meals in the dining room. Of course, those employees were the owners favorites pets and one of them he even promoted to manager! I'd love to have blown the whistle on all of them, but I needed the job and I doubted I would be believed in the first place since I wasn't part of the inner circle. So yeah, as an honest and faithful employee, I found it insulting not to mention ironic that the owner installed a camera to watch the bar while his favorite pets stole steaks and lobsters from him in plain sight! :grr:

Moral of the story: They are watching us-but who the HELL is watching them?!

[FreeStateDemocrat]

15. Done, maybe some people think it might be kinky.

[Sannum]

16. At the airport

when they hand search my bag, I always try to have a thong or a tampon right on top of everything or something to make them embarrised:evilgrin: They usually do not go beyond that...

[me b zola]

21. LOL

One of the last times we flew, they did a random search of my check- on bag. They unzipped a small tote within that containded my "little friend". My embarressment caused me to say in a very *loud* voice, " Yeah, that is my vibrator!" The TSA then promptly zipped everything up and was done with the search.

:rofl:

[Sannum]

23. Ha!

:applause:

[leftynyc]

19. Walked through a gamut of 8 officers

going to subway at Grand Central Station (New York City). Wasn't searched but would have opened my backpack if asked. While I detest the situation, at least they're trying something preventative. What happened in London is very fresh in the minds of us that take public transportation every day.

[ConfuZed]

22. If they are talking about strip searches hell no

but as an african american male I'm used to being searched but if I had a choice I would vote no.

[me b zola]

24. Someone needs to be willing to refuse the search & be arrested

It is the only way to get this unconstitutional matter before the courts.

BOTOH, the courts are being stacked against the people.:scared:

[jane_pippin]

25. Did you read the article that goes with it?

In a nutshell, one part says:
People who refuse to be searched will be allowed to walk away no questions asked but will not be allowed to enter the transit system.

So your average New Yorker or average tourist who doesn't want to be searched is effectively banned from going where they need to go? Am I misunderstanding this?

[leftynyc]

33. Not really

they can take a cab, a bus or walk. What do you think should be done to preventively stop these kinds of attacks?

[jane_pippin]

36. That's true. It just seemed an odd measure to me

That a law abiding person who is within their rights to refuse a search is then also expected to give up a transportation option. And further, if it, god forbid, is someone looking to cause harm then wouldn't they then wind up on a bus or somewhere else causing harm?

I was just asking becuase it seemed like twisted logic to me. I can see how it makes sense but I also think it has a nonsensical aspect to it.

In response to your question: Well obviously I am not a law enforcement expert, (another reason why I wanted to ask the question--someone who knows more than me can help me learn about it). I really don't know. I'm inclined to say that law enforcement officials need to gather as much information as possible (as is relevant and useful) to prevent the attacks from happening. Please don't infer that I am for sneak and peeks and other patriot act style tactics. That isn't what I mean. I mean mounting real investigations against people who are most likely to carry out these attacks. But really, my honest answer is I just don't know. I'm not an anti-terrorism expert.

It is my hope, however, that the solutions we do come up with will not infringe on our civil liberties. There's a lot to debate and no one solution will ever be perfect but I think it's a conversation that needs to take place so we can start coming up with the answer to your question.

[kliljedahl]

26. still the same percentage, 6891 votes

Keith’s Barbeque Central

[LSK]

27. looks like fear is winning again

Where is the "hell no" choice?

[derby378]

32. STILL 68-32 in favor of searches despite nearly 10,000 votes

Has this poll been rigged???

[WhiteTara]

34. very interesting

it wouldn't let me vote no. I also couldn't find a f*ck no button to push.

[Reynardine]

35. Depends....

... on how cute the person searching me is. ;-)