BOSTON (AP) -- Transit police will begin randomly stopping riders on Boston's subways and commuter trains next month to search their bags and packages, a procedure transportation officials say was largely prompted by the March 11 train bombings in Spain.

The new policy is set to be in place for July's Democratic National Convention, MBTA Police Chief Joseph Carter told The Boston Globe for a story in Tuesday editions. It will include explosive-sniffing dogs and all 247 uniformed Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority police officers, he said.

"I have no trepidation about being first (in the nation with the policy)," Carter said. "I don't want to be the first to do an interview about having a serious incident that may have some terrorist indications to it. ... We want to do this to encourage people to feel safe on the MBTA, to utilize public transportation."

Carter said MBTA has not announced the new policy formally because officials still are working out the details on how to balance security and privacy concerns.

Last month, MBTA police announced the entire force has been receiving counterterrorism training that includes spotting suspicious behavior. MBTA police already can request to see the identification of passengers they perceive to be acting suspiciously.

Last month, the U.S. Transportation Security Administration unveiled a pilot program to screen the bags of all passengers at a single Maryland Rail Commuter station in suburban New Carrollton.

MBTA Deputy Police Chief John Martino, who is overseeing the development and implementation of the search policy, said police, sometimes accompanied by explosive-sniffing dogs, will randomly pick out riders for inspection throughout the transit system daily. He said the number of inspections would increase dramatically during the convention July 26-29.

Carol Rose, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said that while she understands the need for security, the MBTA plan is deeply flawed and may violate the U.S. Constitution's ban on unreasonable search and seizure.

"The Fourth Amendment doesn't stop at your wrist when you carry a briefcase; it includes your bag," Rose said. "It either has to be truly random, or it has to have a root in a reasonable basis of suspicion."

The March terror bombings in Madrid, Spain, killed 191 people and were blamed on Islamic militants with possible links to al-Qaeda.

That just strikes me as 1) a way to look like they're doing something when they're really not, and 2) a way to open yourself up to charges of racial profiling and unlawful searches. I mean what are the chances that you're going to find a bomb? Plus, if I were a terrorist I'd just move to a different city (which I guess is good for Boston, but doesn't really solve the problem). The bomb sniffing dog thing might have a better chance - plus then you only have to search people whose bags interest the dog.

I don't think anyone wants to admit it, but there's just no way to be 100% safe. I think the sooner we admit that and agree not to crucify whatever public officials happen to be in office at the time the better off we'll all be. There's no way to foresee every possible terrorist plot. And the government isn't even trying to foresee the next plot - they're too busy trying to stop the last one. We have to take off our shoes so that no shoe-bombers get through. Of course that doesn't stop hat bombers, does it? We guard trains because of the Spanish bombing, but that doesn't stop the next school bus bomb.

While working as a Disney Investigator I was charged with co-authoring the parks policy on searching and reacting to an attack. I saw many areas that were vulnerable( I will not mention it here or anywhere). But since Disney is the size of San Francisco and has a daily population of 150k I know the hell cities of the size of Boston are going through.
Lionel I agree on your conclusion but thats not a reason to not do it. I feel that anything is better then nothing.
I would love to have technology that could sniff an entire area for any explosive or bio-chem 24/7 but thats not happening for awhile or ever.

Seems ok to me. Nobody complains about being open to a search going through an airport - why would a train be any different?

Originally posted by DrewM
Seems ok to me. Nobody complains about being open to a search going through an airport - why would a train be any different?

Because they're thorough and everyone gets checked. If you're only checking a tiny fraction of the riders and you're only looking at their bags, are you really accomplishing anything? Plus, since you're not checking everyone, then you're going to be accused of racial profiling every time you look through the bags of someone with dark skin.

I think everyone should be checked but thats not feasible in a rapid transit system. Because someone would sue them for causing a loss of employment because, even though they had been late 15 times before but the checks held them up one time and he was fired... I can see it now......Dammit we have to stop letting morons sue because they ironed their clothes while wearing them. LOL

:D

Originally posted by LionelHutz
Because they're thorough and everyone gets checked. If you're only checking a tiny fraction of the riders and you're only looking at their bags, are you really accomplishing anything? Plus, since you're not checking everyone, then you're going to be accused of racial profiling every time you look through the bags of someone with dark skin.

Good point.

i hate security. one time at the airport they decided that the trident gum i had in my pocket was suspicious and so they cut it in half and didnt let me have it back.

also sucks for boston because it will take nine forevers to get from place to place.

...train passengers have been sniffed by drug and explosive detecting dogs here Down Under on the Sydney Metro rail system for the last five years, when boarding and leaving trains and on railway platforms. At first, there was outrage..now, no one seems to notice.
Creepy stuff.

I understand the potential for some security measures, but they are not doing any of this on the buses. The potential is there too. Look how many explosions on Israeli buses there have been in the past year.

There is no way to be completely safe. I think a lot of these actions are just show, to give the illusion of safety, and perhaps justify the billions they are throwing into "homeland security".

Think of when they go from Security alert yellow to Orange. What are we supposed to do? Feel extra frightened? There are no differences no interuptions in what we do in our daily lives. we're told to keep shopping but be aware of suspicious behavior.

I think Lionel sums it up very well with some very valid points.

In boston alone there are 1,181,100 (that's million) riders of public transit every single day. This is one city in one state in a union of 50. There is no realistic way to cover every single passanger who comes aboard any transit system.

Pepper I agree that it is a small drop in the bucket, but does that mean we should do nothing? Just not even try? I hope thats not what you are saying.
If we jump into searching people and putting detectors everywhere there would be a cry of big brother, I am losing my personal freedom.. and others as well.
Right after 9/11 people yelled that we didnt do enough and now it appears that we are doing more than we should, hell we cant stop them why even bother. Well thats not the attitude that built this nation but as I have said it is the one that will destroy it.
Pepper this is not directed at you unless you truly believe that nothing is better than something.

Originally posted by Beirut_Veteran
is a small drop in the bucket, but does that mean we should do nothing? Just not even try? I hope thats not what you are saying.

We should absolutely do something. I just hate wasting money just to look like they're doing something. I assume that the most effective anti-terrorist strategies are going to be spy type stuff that most of us will never see or know about. I'm fine with that, personally. I don't need a big show to make me feel more secure.

I don't think that what we are doing is the best way to combat terrorism. I do not think it will make things more secure, I think it's intended to make people feel more insecure.

Random searching does not yeald the results you would expect. In fact it's very inconsistant, and not very effective way to find illegal activities. If anything, it just leads to abuse of police power, and the marginalization of minority groups.

What are we supposed to do if the threat level goes to Orange?

Exactly - we should be doing something. If it is a drop in the bucket to search a handful, maybe every 100th or 1000th person, that could alieve some of the potential harassment. Those things do have some type of counter on them, right?

There should be some type of probable cause too - whether you are 100th, 1000th or 117. If you look suspicious (have brand new, unscuffed shoes, rather overly large bag(s), fit the pic of a wanted terrorist, whatever). I would feel better knowing they searched some passengers on the train I was boarding rather than if they didn't search any.

Search me too, who cares. I have nothing to hide (except the shoe bomb, box cutter and jacknife in my purse, cigarette lighter and a gas can under my dress). :bombout:

Pepper I would disagree with you, as I said in an earlier post this was one of the things I did at Disney. We conducted random searches and found quite a bit, you can not profile but you can use what is called the die system. I will explain, you roll one die, if it comes up 3 then you search every third person after 3 minutes you roll it again and if it 6 then you search 6 for 6 minutes, and so on.
That along with people who are scanning the crowd for people who look nervous and someone to stop those that turn around you will catch alot.
Now a municipality has bigger problems, like not being able to stop those that turn away from the advertised check point and other issues.
But doing something is always better than nothing.
Will it help, yes. Will someone get past, probably. Will it make terrorists think twice and possibly choose a different target, probably.
Lionel I agree that it as expensive and may not be as effective as we want, but Boston could actually search everyone and handle the BS that will follow.