DUH: When you empower nitwits to use their 'discretion' you get abuse of power.

[doc_strange]

I very much encourage you to read the LJ post by mephron linked to below (even if you skip the rest of this post).

Ok, we've been having 'random' searches at airports for a while now, and a lot of people have reported it's not even close to random. People who are off from mainstream reportedly find themselves searched "for security" "randomly" on each and every leg of their journeys. The security folks haven't had anything close to the training we typically give police forces, and there's reports enough over the last 10 years of inappropriate police profiling. So it's not much wonder that these minimally-trained security folks can't shake the idea that they're looking for 'someone doing or having something wrong' whether it's a security 'wrong' or not. I guess we thus find them feeling like they should search anyone they find weird.

More or less, we're back in the 1950s -- the 1950s USSR. It should thus come as no wonder then that we're starting to hear about security personnel abusing the power of search and seizure to enforce their personal beliefs on the unsuspecting, defenseless public. In this era of hype, we have forgotten to up the penalties on abuse of power. 50 to 1 says the abusive guard -- at worst -- gets reprimanded or fired. I believe he should be slapped in prison as the worst kind of terrorist: the kind that, given a sacred trust, abuses it to harm those he's sworn to protect.

Comments

[keyne.livejournal.com]

Words fail me.

[keyne.livejournal.com]

OK, they don't entirely. See the BoingBoing followup:

Just spoke with people from New York Waterway, who say:

1. They're trying to track down mephron (the original poster) to get more detailed information from him--e.g., time and ferry route.

2. If the story is true, it is not only a violation of company policy, but also of martime regulations, and if it is true, they wish to correct the situation as quickly as possible.

3. Anyone with further information about it are invited to contact them directly.

They're idiots if they haven't "tracked him down" already -- his resume is a few clicks away from that entry -- but it's a start.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Hrm. Well, that's something. It's a pity the kid has to stick his neck out. It's also a pity the guard is probably only subject to internal disciplinary action, and not criminal charges. Abuse of financial trust, we call "embezzlement," but we have no felony term for abuse of a public trust.

HI!

[mephron]

I'm 35. 'kid' is not the word I'd use....

Re: HI!

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Argh. Sorry about that! Being an old fart myself (37), I understand rankling at the assumption. In any event, rephrasing: "It's a pity the fellow has to stick his neck out." Really, the guard should be seriously reprimanded, but it's lousy that in order for him to receive his due, you would have to become further involved. I wonder how many other little experiments he and other ones have undertaken without being called on it.