Unsuck DC Metro: Metro Still Insulting Riders with Security Theater

Friday, October 19, 2012

Metro Still Insulting Riders with Security Theater

Via @Julie Borowski: Bag checks at Foggy Bottom metro. More security theater. #wmata pic.twitter.com/9GMSflJ2

Update: During the last Finance Committee meeting, Metro agreed to accept $7.7 million more from the feds for more anti-terrorism efforts. You can hear the committee ask about it at 4:47 here. (H/T FixWMATA)

From Luke:

The other day at Foggy Bottom, during the evening rush, there was an extensive security detail present outside the turnstiles. There were three police officers at the top of the escalators, five in the lobby at the bottom, and what I believe were two TSA agents standing behind a folding table with what appeared to be two of those bomb sniffing machines they put the swabs in. It did not appear they were searching any bags, or doing much of anything for that matter.

As if the fare hikes, poor service, lies, and empty marketing schemes aren't insulting enough.

How many terrorist plots have random bag checks foiled? WTOP reported in June that there had been no arrests as a result of the two-year program.

How many crimes has this misallocation of resources enabled?

Here's a post from a while back about bag searches. I have yet to hear an argument to counter it.

The dog is a nice touch. Poor thing having to hang out in a Metro station.

Comments (31)

Logging you in...

Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout

Logged in as

+19 Vote up Vote down

WMATA Security Dog · 649 weeks ago

Bow-wow.

Ruff-ruff.

Bark.

3 replies · active 648 weeks ago

+46 Vote up Vote down

unsuckdcmetro 92p · 649 weeks ago

WMATA security dog's bark would be out of service.

+1 Vote up Vote down

Alb2non · 648 weeks ago

The sniffing dogs is good if you had enough of them through out the entire system. The TSA and others is ludicrous unless you have them at every entrance.
You would have to install metal detectors, TSA Security, bag searches, scanning and screening at every station to have a secure system and that is not fool proof.

More trained canine dogs are the best idea in my opinion.

+1 Vote up Vote down

Guest · 648 weeks ago

Is that you McGruff? Better watch it!!!

+7 Vote up Vote down

VeggieTart · 649 weeks ago

Security expert Gavin de Becker once said that there we things that genuinely made us safer and things that only provide the illusion of safety. The Metro bag searches fall firmly into the latter category. After all, if you know Metro well enough, it's not too hard to go to another station or entrance and use that to get around the bag check, especially if those checks are in the "core", as Metro calls it. If they're doing bag checks at Foggy Bottom, and the weather isn't bad, I will walk the five or so blocks to Farragut West. Or I'll catch a bus to the next Metro station in the general direction I'm going.

2 replies · active 649 weeks ago

+15 Vote up Vote down

Kaye · 649 weeks ago

Seriously! Even the dumbest terrorist would see the police, turn around, walk out, and go to the next station. Not to mention that a bag check wouldn't do anything to stop explosives concealed in a vest.

What would actually make me feel safer (not from terrorism, but from the fights/crush of passengers/potential robbery) would be police walking on the platform or through the train cars. I don't understand why that wouldn't be the obvious choice.

+4 Vote up Vote down

Narwhal 741 · 649 weeks ago

I agree with Kaye, that the random bag searches are all too easy for the terrorist/bomber to avoid. There is nothing that prevents them from having a scout going a head of the terrorist/bomber checking to see if the target station is clear. If the scout found the station was swarming police officers, the scout could easily get on the cell phone and tell their cohort’s to go to station B instead of station A.

I remember that back in 1996 transit police would go walking through the cars making sure everything was ok. Also, I would see a transit officer in the various stations from time to time. In the last few years I cannot remember seeing any transit officers walking through the cars. I have seen them standing around in the last cars of the train or sometimes in the middle car of the trains. I cannot remember seeing any transit officer patrolling the platform of either Metro center or Gallery place. I am hoping that I am the only one to notice this and the transit officers are walking through the cars of the trains and are patrolling the station platforms when I am not riding the trains.

+7 Vote up Vote down

Tom · 649 weeks ago

I saw the same setup at Virginia Square a couple weeks ago. When one guy walked in and went up to the table with his bag, they waved him through and said they didn't need to check his bag. Maybe they're not checking white people, but it seems like they can't even do security theater properly...

2 replies · active 649 weeks ago

+1 Vote up Vote down

Sizzle · 649 weeks ago

Yeah I saw this going on at Navy Yard station once. None of the officers batted an eye when I walked past them and went right through the turnstiles. I guess white women have been pre-cleared?

-1 Vote up Vote down

Charlene · 649 weeks ago

Yeah cause we all know that blacks are known for blowing up stuff <insert sarcasm here>

+15 Vote up Vote down

Sizzle · 649 weeks ago

Again, unless they had police at every Metro station all the time, this isn't going to stop anything. Anyone who wanted to cause harm could pretty easily turn around and leave before being subjected to a search.

Hell, I've only seen a random search once at Navy Yard and you could tell what was going on from a mile away. There were cop cars surrounding the station.

I really feel sorry for anyone who truly believes this condescending and fund-consuming bullshit stunt is making them any safer.

+13 Vote up Vote down

drew · 649 weeks ago

I was at the meeting in 2011. they said they have a number and when they reach it they will check that persons bag. If they refuse to be searched they allow that person to leave. I pointed out that if a terrorist knew,or saw them, that they could just go to the next station. The MetroPD had no response to that. They also said because the way the trains came into the stations ,the wind created wouldn't allow the dog to sniff for bombs properly.

this is all PR bullshit. I wish Metro would put the dog and cops on the platforms. it's simple police work and they can't seem to get that right.

+5 Vote up Vote down

SLG · 649 weeks ago

I take the Metro from Cheverly to Franconia-Springfield in the morning and back in the afternoon. I see the security theater set up in the Franconia-Springfield station at least once every 2 weeks. Never been stopped or even approached. I have yet to see anything set up for Cheverly since they started this "program." Obviously, terrorists only come through certain stations between 7:00-9:30am or 4-6:30pm, so that's why they set up when and where they do. What a waste of time and money.

2 replies · active 649 weeks ago

+5 Vote up Vote down

Steve · 649 weeks ago

That is a hell of a metro commute, SLG. You are a brave soul.

+3 Vote up Vote down

SLG · 649 weeks ago

It's actually not that bad, assuming the trains are running when they are supposed to.

Oh wait.

+12 Vote up Vote down

SEA · 649 weeks ago

I wish there was more of a police presence on the trains all the time. Fine the people who are drinking and eating, fine the people who listen to their music full blast w/their earphones on. Fine the parents of the school kids who are obnoxious, eat, scream, threaten other passengers. Increase the fine for every infraction and Metro would find more revenue. Yes, it would cost the Metro to hire extra police officers. Where could they find the money to do this? Raise fares? No, sell the " work" cars of the executives who drive to work instead of taking the Metro, or God forbid, drive themselves to work. Here's a thought for Metro executives. KISS. Keep. It. Simple. Stupid. Another thought, fire anyone employee who is rude to a paying customer, fellow driver on the road or who can't obey basic traffic laws. Not sure what I mean by rude? Giving anyone the finger is rude. Refusing to answer a question of any paying customer by rolling their eyes and sucking on their teeth is rude. Screw your unions. The majority of your employees suck. There are plently of jobless Americans who will gladly take a job and do their daily job with a smile.

+16 Vote up Vote down

Dan Stessel · 649 weeks ago

One of our new customer service enhancements is in full swing. RUFF+ started some time ago and has been in effect with exceptional results ever since.

RUFF+ places bomb sniffing dogs at our station entrances to seek out terrorists that are trying to cause a minor disruption by blowing up a train. Our highly trained bomb sniffing dogs can detect trace explosives, pounce on the terrorist, chew the detonator out of his hand, and then allow him to pass through the faregates without any chance of detonating his device. Someone made a claim that the dog couldn't detect the explosives due to the wind from trains. This is not true. There are no winds and everything is perfectly fine.

RUFF+ is a successful program. This is evident by the fact that we have not experienced a terrorist related minor disruption yet.

+1 Vote up Vote down

Red Line · 649 weeks ago

Does anyone know what is up with the police presence at Dupont? They have a little area set up overlooking the trains.

Another question- what would happen if I refused to let them search my bags?

1 reply · active 649 weeks ago

+3 Vote up Vote down

Kaye · 649 weeks ago

They'll refuse you entry to the Metro. It is illegal to arrest for refusing to be searched- *but* if the officer decides your refusal constitutes 'suspicious behavior', s/he can detain and frisk you without your consent (http://voices.yahoo.com/the-terry-frisk-rights-police-officers-stop-128898.html). Likewise, you're not legally obligated to disclose your name/produce ID, but that can be further indication of 'suspicious behavior'.

Basically, you can be arrested even though the arrest itself may be illegal.

+3 Vote up Vote down

Matt · 649 weeks ago

I've been searched twice, both on my way out of the station. I have a backpack with many zippers, but they asked me to open just one and I moved along.

-8 Vote up Vote down

**DOLPH STRIKE** · 649 weeks ago

Normally I agree that metro is usually in the wrong, however, this is one area I disagree with the commenters (although some good points about more patrols on the cars would be probably be helpful). Some things to consider when you see these instances of 'security theater' :
1.) We don't have access to the intelligence reports generated by the community. There may be a specific, or even general, concern or potential threat about a particular metro asset that causes enough concern for a presence to be established in order to increase the likelihood of thwarting an attack.
2.) This isn't like boarding a plane where everyone must be searched because profiling is unpaltable in our country. If there is no specific threat, then randomly searching or scanning the area is probably the best way to identify a suspicious person. Be thankful they don't stop everyone as most people riding the metro are completely harmless.

4 replies · active 649 weeks ago

-5 Vote up Vote down

**DOLPH STRIKE** · 649 weeks ago

3.) The presence of TSA or other federal agents produces some positive secondary effects for local polices by heightening awareness of recent threat trends. It also re-emphasizes the need to be concerned with terrorist activity when a typical police officer probably faces other isseus day-to-day and this may sink to the back of their minds.
4.) Though presence patrols are good for deterring crime, their effectiveness is more questionable in deterring terrorism. That is, crimes are often based on opportunity. Terrorist plots are planned, involve recon, dry runs, etc. Randomized countermeasures make sense in this case and should be included in a comprehensive security plan.
5.) Of course you see them from 7 - 9:30 am and 4 - 6:30 pm. Obviously that is when the most people are using the system and would thus produce the most consequences if something were to occur. It'd be more wasteful to see them do it saturday morning from 9 - 11.

-5 Vote up Vote down

**DOLPH STRIKE** · 649 weeks ago

6.) The odds of these teams actually finding something themselves at the station are of course low, which is why there haven't been any arrests in two years. If people are getting caught at the station by these guys, that would be of a bigger concern because that means every other arm of our security apparatus has failed and we would have a more serious problem.

I could go on, but I just wanted to point out a few things. There are a lot of things wrong with Metro, but I don't think this is one of them. This is by no means a perfect policy, but it's probably better than most of the alternatives. Let's figure out a way to keep the trains running regularly isntead and not spend too much time complaining about counterterrorism policy...

+1 Vote up Vote down

VeggieTart · 649 weeks ago

Well, when it comes to boarding a plane, ALL bags are subject to search. You can't fly without sending your bags through that little X-ray thing and, in some cases getting body-scanned and/or felt up. Never mind that most people taking a plane are completely harmless and you're more likely to endure an aural assault from a screaming baby than any terror attack.

The problem with these random searches at Metro is 1) doing spot searches isn't very effective. You may pull over someone who is harmless while someone who intends to do harm walks by. 2) If someone doesn't want to be searched, he can easily go to another station, especially if he's in the core area. 3) You said it yourself: Attacks of this sort are well-planned. If people plan on carrying out an attack, no doubt they'll have procedures for contingencies such as this. They can delay their attack or get on the Metro at another station.

It's security theatre, nothing more.

-6 Vote up Vote down

**DOLPH STRIKE** · 649 weeks ago

huh. it's weird. it's like you tried to disagree with my point, yet you proved your own lack of understanding regarding security. You improperly cherry-picked one point and disregarded everything or completely argued ineffectively.

First off, it's not the random searches that would be the most effective in this situation. It's the random appearances.

Secondly, security is complex and multi-layered. As I stated, this would be the outermost, first line of security/deterrence. This action shouldn't be catching weapons, explosives, or anything else at the checkpoints. This, coupled with other things such as cameras, alert citizens. police patrols, and physical security barriers would all serve as the most basic form of defense. The psychological impacts of such countermeasures increase the level of difficulty and sophistication for an enemy to pull off a successful attack. Perhaps, then, they choose a different target that is easier and less consequential.

+4 Vote up Vote down

Bill · 649 weeks ago

I'd like to know just what the $7.7 million of your and my money buys us. That's an awfully high number if it's salary. Unless it's for the WMATA board. And it can't possibly cover another year of bag check nonsense.

+3 Vote up Vote down

Matt #2 · 649 weeks ago

TSA is security theater. This seems closer to a local elementary school production.

+1 Vote up Vote down

steve · 648 weeks ago

Making retards feel safer, but not actually make them safer. Catering to RETARDS

0 Vote up Vote down

Omomori · 646 weeks ago

I was stopped at the Bethesda station today and when they swabbed my bags, they were flagged for explosives (which is ridiculous, but I hear false positives are common). I was taken aside - they wrote down all my personal information, including my place of employment, my job function and my address. They were friendly enough, but overall the whole thing felt very threatening and big-brotherish. I'm worried about what they're going to do with my information.

0 Vote up Vote down

Chris · 644 weeks ago

DOLPH has some interesting points, but how do you respond to the fact that the police presence is easily seen from outside the station? And that for "core stations", someone could easily walk to the next station where there is likely no security check in progress? It seems pretty logical that bad guys could easily plan to get around such minor inconviences.

0 Vote up Vote down

Chris · 644 weeks ago

Of course, at the same time, if, God forbid, something bad ever did happen in the Metro system, people would be asking why Metro didn't do more random searches. Metro really can't win either way.