My DH works as a DOD police officer on a federal installation.  I have to say, I ached to comment on the last post, but you have such learned readers, I might come off as a comment rube. 

Now, I just have to say it.

I don’t know the story, and I haven’t read it all the way through but I *know my husband doesn’t board a city bus at the installation’s gate “demanding papers,” he asks for military ID.  After all, it is an AIR FORCE BASE and if one doesn’t have proper ID, they have to obtain permission.

And the request for ID is not to harass but to ensure the safety of the installation and its inhabitants.

People like Davis would be the first ones to complain about inadequate security should—oh, I don’t know a BUS—blow up on federal property.  Again.

It’s people who think there cannot be a trade off of “personal freedom” to ensure adequate safety in the face of terrorist threats that are living in cartoon land.  I don’t want to jeopardize civil liberties but—COME ON. 

So.  Let me have it.

Sorry.  I wasn’t referring to a bus blowing up on federal property—I meant a Ryder Truck.

You never have to hold back your thoughts--as long as they’re presented respectfully, everyone here plays pretty nice with each other. Even when they disagree.

Here’s why I don’t agree with you:

1- She shouldn’t be required to carry ID to take the bus from near her home to work. If the installation does truly need to be secured, then a public bus shouldn’t run through the property.

2- They aren’t checking the ID for anything useful. They aren’t checking it against a “no ride” list or for explosives or for criminals. They’re just saying, “Hey, show me your driver’s license.”

3- If they are worried about explosives, then check the bus, or any other vehicles, for explosives--which has precisely nothing to do with handing over ID. It would have been more intrusive, but I would actually have been more sympathetic to a request to inspect bags and briefcases during an alert; it’s a more meaningful check designed to ensure that a person isn’t carrying weapons or explosives into the area. What does an ID check prove other than the fact that the person can produce ID on demand? That isn’t a security check in the same way that requesting a military ID to get onto a military base is a security check.

Now, feel free to fire back.

I have been reigned in by DH.  Apparently, I didn’t have my facts straight.  (Duh.) Apparently, the procedure is to ask those with military IDs to produce same—and then those that do not produce ID are escorted to a waiting center.  THEN the bus is checked for explosives, THEN it’s allowed to proceed.

At least I think that’s how he said it goes.

You said:  What does an ID check prove other than the fact that the person can produce ID on demand?

Excellent point.  And I hadn’t thought of it that way.  Honestly, after so many years of producing ID on demand as a military spouse, it’s just something you get used to.  I don’t look at it as a threat to my civil liberties, just another part of my routine day.  I guess that would make me a “trouble-adverse sheep,” but you know, I yam what I yam.

If the installation does truly need to be secured, then a public bus shouldn’t run through the property.

BAM!

...sorry, the restaurant to which I took my wife last night was showing Emeril Lagasse on TV.

David’s right; this is pretend security*.  Its only purpose is to make people think they are safer.

And I say that as a former military dependant, so I know what you mean about automatically producing ID on demand.  I don’t think the </i>purpose</i> of these checks is to habituate people to respond docilely to demands for their papers; that’s just an unanticipated “benefit”.

* See also:  Airport security checks.  If you want real security on aircraft, issue a riot baton to each passenger.  That won’t stop a bomb, but it won’t work any worse than what the security critters are doing now.