Security...But Not at My Expense

In anticipation of potential problems in the city during the run-up to next week's election or to prevent it, Metro officials have decided to kick off increased security screening to ensure that the system continues to run safely and without incident. Implementing a security screening process similar to what New York City implemented following September 11th, the Washington Metro system has begun to randomly screen passengers again in an effort to prove the presence of increased security and to deter any potential troublemakers. The problem is that many people are a bit wary of the increased security measures and are concerned as to how these measures will be implemented.

It never fails really. Every time there is an increase in security measures some place someone has an objection to it. People who use the system every day are concerned that these random checks aren't really random at all and that once again the spectre of racial profiling will rear its ugly head while others feel that it should be applied equally to all passengers regardless of race, color or creed. Now while that would be perfect in a perfect world, I feel that there is something inherently wrong with that concept and that's simply because people haven't thought things through. People have said that screening of all passengers would ensure equal treatment but already at airports (where such a concept exists) we're already arriving hours ahead of time in order to avoid missing our flights, do we now need to think about arriving at the train station hours ahead of our intended departure to do the same?

And what about the fact that many stations don't have the space or the capability of handling such huge crowds for random screening? Have you actually seen some of these stations at rush hour? The Marine Corps Marathon looks less congested in comparison to the way stations like Metro Center look during the height of rush hour so where then will these security screenings of all passengers take place? Outside the stations? Well if you do that then think about when it's raining, snowing or what have you. Do people actually think that passengers rushing to get to work or rushing to get home are going to stand in line for a long period of time before getting on the train to work? Instead of promoting a safe alternative to driving into the city, you'll see a rise in people driving to work. Less hassle.

And that is the essential factor that drives a lot of this discussion. Hassle. Many of us talk about the need or desire for less hassle but increased security. We want to be safe but we never want it to affect us. People who make these claims are rarely the ones pulled aside for 'random' screenings. Call it racist or bigoted but if you haven't been pulled aside repeatedly then you have no right to say that it isn't inconvenient. I don't behave suspiciously when I travel, I am a born citizen and I am a law-abiding resident of our nation's capital but because of my skin tone or ethnic look I am more likely to be scrutinized than some of my neighbors. Is that fair? I think these random bag searches are a happy median and if something to be implemented this is better than nothing. Those of us who have nothing to hide but will be screened more randomly than others are already resigned to that fact so it really doesn't matter in the end but I don't think people should look at it as the most viable solution.