Any time I walk through a Tube station these days I see at least four police officers (and sometimes more). What are they doing? They're chatting, studying their nails, shifting from foot to foot, or simply looking bored and pissed off.
I don't blame them: as an approach to dealing with the terrorist threat I have to wonder who thought this was a good idea.
What precisely are they supposed to do?
Let's imagine an actual suicide bomber is approaching them - presumably in peak hour, when the entrance hall to the Tube will be packed with people.
First they have to somehow - perhaps by mental telepathy? - identify the bomber from among all of the other people dragging suitcases, lugging large backpacks, or boxes of what appear to be electrical items from the sales.
Then what do they do? They challenge the person, approach, then are the first to get blown up, together with all of the people around. If it is a less confined space than a Tube carriage I guess the carnage would be slightly less, and help would reach the victims more easily, but does the degree of improvement justify the expenditure of resources? I doubt it.
The theory goes that they are supposed to "reassure" the public. But anyone with half a brain will have reached the same conclusion as I - and the apparent emergency state of London, with police very visible everywhere, can only be adding to the panic among those of nervous disposition. (Reports are suggesting Tube usage is down 15 per cent - or to put it the other way around, 85 per cent of people are going about their business perfectly normally.)
After what is increasingly looking like the most horrific misjudgement in the shooting of Charles de Menezes, the police doing nothing might be a good thing, but surely they could do it more cheaply and sensibly by getting back on to a normal footing.
What they are now doing, as Matthew Parris points out in The Times today, is glorifying the suicide bomber.
Article comments
1 - Balletshooz
Something definitely has to be done but random searches and shoot to kill aren't the answer. Especially in the US where the 4th amendment says the police cant search you, except with probable cause. Is it probable cause to stop a man entering the subway with a trenchcoat and a huge backpack? What if he is muslim?
2 - 1Potato
The forth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures (it only mentions probably cause with regard to warrants).
So searching people with trenchcoats and huge backpacks may very well be reasonable under the circumstances we face. Besides, they already do such searches at airports, so it is not unprecedented.
How old are you anyway? Why is it that some people never grow out of the liberal indoctrination they get at college, no matter how bogus it turns out to be? Cops are not perfect, but overall, they are good. A few are bad, but most are good.
Terrorists = bad guys.
Cops = good guys.
Who do you call to stop a burglar, your leftist lingusitics professor or a cop? Or better, who does she call?
Joe
3 - Natalie Bennett
If you call the cops in London, they'll give you a crime number to claim on your insurance, then tell you to go away....
Your linguistics professor might be able to help you fill in the insurance form, so they're about equally useful.