[%-)]Last night as I was taking the DC’s metro into DC to get work, I was looking at one of my railroad atlases, minding my business.[:)] Well, I get to Union Station, go to crew office to call for the shuttle van that will take me out to the s & i shop and sit in the lunch room to wait.[:)] While waiting, a female Amtrak cop walks in and walks straight towards me and asks, ‘do you work here?’[%-)] I told her yes, and that she has seen me out at the high speed rail shop many times in the past months (she’s a newbie).[%-)][%-)] She agreed and then asked me if I had a railroad atlas, which I replied ‘yes’ and showed it to her.[sigh] She apologized and said that a passenger on the metro train saw me reading my atlas and thought that was suspious and then reported me to her (the cop) when this person saw me walking towards the crew office.[%-)] Now…probably one would think that I would laugh this off, but I’m not!![:(!] This person, that accused me of possibly being a terrorist had better hope they don’t cross my path in the metro system when I’m taking it at night!![censored] If I find out who it is, I’ll be the one to call the cops, have their butts detained and press charges!![:(!] I think it’s one of those regular commuters that catch the last MARC train to Baltimore…I’ll find them.[:-,]
I’m not amused at this story, either – but in exactly the opposite direction.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with someone being worried about nonstandard behavior on a transit system, and asking a cop to look into it. Absolutely no difference, in fact, from a rider noticing something like spikes on the track or pry marks on signal-equipment access doors and making the same request.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with said cop then approaching the person involved and asking for confirmation. If they know you, or remember who you are, they won’t bother (and will probably just tell the excitable rider ‘he works for the railroad’). If not, it’ll take no time at all for a ‘newbie’ to remember you, or for you to demonstrate there isn’t a problem.
Believe me, if terrorists were about to cause trouble on a transit system, it would not be difficult for them to fake up railroaders’ uniforms. Or perhaps take the appropriate analog of the ‘conductor classes’ required by BNSF et al. for initial employment consideration… so ‘railroad appearance’, and perhaps even some plausible ‘railroad-related material’, might be no guide of reasonability.
Yes, I get colossally pissed when people don’t recognize that I belong somewhere I do, and ask for confirmation. But that rider didn’t “accuse you of being a terrorist” – or even “accuse you of being suspicious” – he or she very appropriately saw behavior that wasn’t typical and equally appropriately referred the question to an appropriate authority.
Just exactly what ‘charges’ do you intend to try to get him or her detained on, and what charges will you press?
I do think it would be valuable for the original cop – the newbie – to make the appropriate correction to the person concerned, the next time they see him or her riding the train: “I investigated the situation, and the person you saw works for the railroad, and had every right to carry and read that material.” After which she could a
Today I was told that if I want to take photographs at the Sydney (Central) station, I have to get a pass to do so (because of the risk of terrorism).
In order not to further upset the situation, I didn’t point out that I had a higher (Defence Secret) security access than the police, and limited myself to saying I wasn’t a terrorist and had been taking photos without restriction for forty years at that location.
It was too late for a meaningful discussion with the bureaucrats, but I’ll try during the next week. I’ll report any useful outcomes.
Oh, come on, Overmod. You are glad that they checked and found that he had “every right to carry and read that material”? Who would you say does not have that right?
I happen to have in my possession a schematic of every highway in the United States, with tunnels and vulnerable bridges clearly marked, passed to me by a shadowy character who said he was named Rand McNally. Do I have one of these rights to carry and read it?
Furthermore, I have heard that terrorists use electricity, taxi cabs, Chicken McNuggets, Stair Masters and dictionaries. I’m going to feel a lot better when we start checking up on everybody who uses those.
I wonder if I take out my calculator , they might think it’s a remote detonator. If I play drums on the seat, it might be morris code to other terrorists.
Ooooo, that Rand NcNally, I too have some of his material, he must be some kind of Mr. Big, and he sounds Irish, I better send Special Branch after him…
There is something wrong with someone being worried about nonstandard behavior - specifically defining what non-standard behavior is! As we can see from this thread, what looks perfectly suspicious to you appears perfectly normal to me.
Is a person who is reading a tourist’s guide to Washington, DC suspicious? After all, they are looking for places people would gather so they can attack there, right? Now you have whole trainloads of suspicious people. In addition, they aren’t dressed like us!
lfish has it right - in fact, I have a railroad atlas that the nefarious Rand McNally provided to me! Next I’m going to be branded as suspicious because I’m reading a article about terrorists…
As attributed to Gen Douglas MacArthur:
“The powers in charge keep us in a perpetual state of fear, keep us in a continous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real.”
The security officer should have informed the woman that in this country
every one is free to read what ever they want to, and if it really bothers her
she is welcome to change her seat!
Remember the TV ad that shows all the flags flying? The TV ad doesn’t
tell the whole story. The country was changed.
All the houses are flying flags, but there isn’t anyone on the street.
They are all cowering inside their houses, perceiving every stranger
as a threat, while the police stop and question anyone that does
anything “nonstandard.” Like reading a book on the train!?
The only thing that upsets me about what you said is that you beat me to it.
The story, as it was relayed to us, impinges on NO constitutional rights. We have never had the right not to be asked a question by a police officer–although we may have the right ot refuse to answer. The officer was not excessive in conducting her investigation, and did not ask anything she did not have a right to ask.
I don’t understand how a police officer asking a few questions to check up upon something that someone considers out of place is invasive. If one of these questions foils a terrorist plot, the inconvenience certainly seems worth it to me. The officer did her job. People who complain about such activity rarely seem to offer an alternative for spotting terrorist and protecting people from them.
I am the first person to stand up and scream when concerns about terrorism interfer with our constitutional RIGHTS. When an officer approaches me and asks why I am observing trains, I gladly and politely give him my name, address, and any other reasonable information that he or she might require. But, if they ask me to leave, I ask them to point me to a law I am violating or an ordinance that requires me to leave. If they cannot, I do not leave–even if I was planning to do so before they questioned me.
I understand that no one likes to be accused of being a terrorist. But, we can rest assured that there are many Americans making much larger sacrifices than answering questions that an officer had a right to ask. I think the least we all can do–as rail fans and citizens–is to try to understand that the questions are being asked for our safety, and–as long as officers are not trying to get us to do something that we have a right not to do–be cooperative.
Gabe
P.S. Larry, I am not taking issue with your post, and do not doubt your underlying contention. However, I can’t pass up the opportunity to take a pot shot at Dug
Actually, that’s because that’s not really that big a stretch. When I went with a friend of mine down to a professional sports stadium when he was applying for a job there, they made us do something with our cell phones. The idea was if it can do something that a cell phone is supposed to do, then its a real one and not a small explosive device or a detonator.
I have no problem with what the officer did - she acted in a timely and appropriate manner. I have a problem with someone questioning an activity not because of a threat, but because of paranoia - that is invasive. Last night I had to deal with a person who doesn’t like people parking in front of her house. She successfully got the town fathers to post no parking signs on her side of the street. I had to move my vehicle (a good 75 yards from her house, and questionable as to whether it’s actually in the no parking area), as did a number of people who were attending a school open house (directly across the street from her house), all because the old biddy doesn’t like it and called the cops. And believe me, she will call the cops before you can close your car door.
Doug didn’t play well with others from time to time, either (ask his friend, Harry). All that considered, I’d be tempted to ignore the quote if I didn’t think it was as true today as it w
It is invasive because it is interrupting my activities in pursuit of my
happiness! No one, not private citizen nor LEO has the right to
stop me and inquire about my activities unless I am obviously
violating the law.
Remember, the terrorists on 9/11 did not violate any laws until
they hijacked the aircraft, so what will be accomplished by stopping
and questioning law abiding citizens engaged in legal activities?
Nothing! But it allows the “authorities” to claim they are doing
something about terrorism.
The LEO stopping to question your lawful activities is just a few
words short of “Identity papers, Comrade!”
Remember what Ben Franklin said. Please read this carefully
and think about it seriously.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
Overmod & Gabe,
We are actually in pretty substantial agreement here, and I don’t mean to belabor the point.
But what bothers me is the belief, which seems to be taking hold in a lot of places today, that we all have rights but had better have a good excuse for trying to exercise them.
Overmod provided the opening when he said that gfw proved to the cop’s satisfaction that he had a right to carry the atlas. What if GFW hadn’t provided an answer that satisfied the cop? What if GFW had been reading the Koran, and couldn’t come up with a satisfactory answer as to why? It is still none of the cop’s damn business, that’s what. That’s what a right is. I don’t have to explain to you or to anybody else why I read what I read or do what I do, unless somebody has some reasonable belief that I am involved in a crime.
We all know there are bad guys planning to harm us, and for all we know they need a rail atlas to do their evil. But our friend didn’t seem to be constructing a bomb at the moment, or doing anything other than looking at a book. When we start thinking that looking at any book is a reason for a police inquiry, I’m going to start wondering about this wonderful deomocracy we are defending.
As I say, I’m sort of trying to make a point here, and don’t mean to imply that either of you is a proponent of a police state.
When the people demand that something be done, the politicians and bureaucrats in charge react with a highly visibile action, even if it doesn’t make sense.
In my industry we are encouraged to have a questioning attitude. If we even so much as have a hint of suspicion that something is not right, we are encouraged to question it, even if it’s not our department. Safety is everyone’s responsibility, and the same extends to everyday life.
The average person is not a railfan, and would have no idea what is “normal” on a railroad. If that person has a hint of suspicion about an individual, what harm does it do to have a cop ask a few questions? What if it happened to be a terrorist, and they hadn’t said anything. Was afraid of someone being upset at being suspected? Or assumed the person belonged? If an attack then occured because that person hadn’t reported their suspicions, how would they feel? They’d probably be accused of being in on it!
I’m also curious as to what charges you would like to see filed. There is not a single charge, either criminal or civil, that could be hung on that individual. They were only doing what the current government asks and expects them to do, and you were in no way inconvienced.
Unfortunately, a few radicals have ruined it for everyone, and from now on you’ll just have to learn to live with suspicion and paranoia. There is no going back now.
P.S. If he hadn’t had a satisfactory answer? More than likely the cops wasn’t interested in his answer, but in how he answered. As you mentioned, everyone, even terrorists, have a right to read that material. But what would be of interest to the cop would be his eyes, his nervousness, his body language. That coupled with his explanation would determine whether he was worth taking a clsoer look at.
I was told that Al Qaida has picked up a old trick used by the Japanese
they are farting in morse code and this require the slowly eating of british beans.
I am one whom is aware of Security as was a receiver at a Mall/office
complex which held the main Telecommunications centre.I being paided 6.15
was the main line of defense against car bombs ect.after Oklahoma bombing
I became creeped as eyed a unknown Ryders 5 ton.
People please step back and consider the person and use the art of body
language words used ect and then judge.