Commentary>The Monitor's View
from the June 17, 2004 edition

Random Searches on Trains

A hefty $12 billion in federal money has been authorized for aviation security since 9/11, but compare that with just $115 million to boost rail security. Yet some 3.4 billion passengers took trains and subways in 2002, compared with 552.7 million who flew on airplanes that year.
Related stories:
02/25/04
02/10/03
09/14/01

Get all the Monitor's headlines by e-mail.
Subscribe for free.
E-mail this story
Write a letter to the Editor
Printer-friendly version

After the Madrid train bombings of 3/11, which killed 191 people and presumably were organized by Al Qaeda, the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) rightly has been testing high-tech, bomb-screening machines at commuter train stations in the Washington, D.C. area, and working to increase and streamline security at Amtrak stations.

All well and good. But beginning in July in Boston, and just in time for the Democratic convention in that city, police largely will put such techno-wizardry aside, and conduct random searches of train and subway passengers - hand checking bags and IDs.

Already, the American Civil Liberties Union is calling the move "pretend security." And a number of legal experts argue that passengers have the right to refuse to be searched.

But while this first-in-the-nation train-security program clearly differs from the TSA's - is it really all that different from random checkpoints for drunk drivers that police often set up on holidays, or random searches at airports?

The program, however, will need careful tending. While the idea may scare away would-be terrorists, random searches have a low probability of actually nabbing them. Experts say that a random search of 1 in 10 would not even boost security all that much. And such random searches will need constant monitoring to make sure they are truly random and don't become a mask for racial profiling or other abuses.

Boston is a city that's seen more than its share of racial troubles. The need remains especially acute to strike the necessary balance between careful screening with passenger convenience, and to avoid infringements of civil liberties at the same time.




Get Monitor stories by e-mail:
(Your e-mail address will be protected by csmonitor.com's tough privacy policy.)
(Jim Watson/AP) Afghanistan war decision: how Robert Gates thinks
Pentagon chief Robert Gates is the swing vote in Obama's decision on the Afghanistan war.

POLITICS Patchwork Nation
The American voter beyond red and blue


Daily podcast

Monitor Reports

Discussions with Monitor reporters from around the world


Today

Pat Murphy

US unemployment rate hits 10 percent.




Making a difference
Making a Difference

What happens when ordinary people decide to pay it forward? Extraordinary change. See how individuals are making a difference, finding solutions, overcoming adversity, and giving back globally.

A recent graduate of Vermont's Middlebury College, Corinne Almquist promotes the practice of distributing produce that would otherwise go to waste to those in need.

Sarah Beth Glicksteen

The need to feed hungry families cultivates new interest in gleaning

Corinne Almquist wants to restore the biblical tradition of harvesting what farmers leave behind.