Securitisn’t – Part 3 – End Game

This is Part 3 of my asking the question about whether or not the highly visible security deterrents  are actually worth it, or just a pretend make you feel good effort.

Hopefully, you are beginning to see that securitisn’t pervades all aspects of life in the U.S. The real shame is as I have stated before, once things change – like the closure of Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House, it will never reopen. (For the record, I do quite like the promenade in front of the WH, but for all the Secret Service vehicles and officers that clutter up this highly secure area).

Arbitrary decision by politicians in Congress and Federal agencies do have a tangible impact on our quality of life in the nation’s capital. For example, why must tour and city buses be subjected to stop and speak with a U.S. Capitol Police officer each time they pass. And to that point, do we really need multiple USCP officers on every corner around the Capitol and house buildings? Does that make one feel safer? Would it really be a threat for me to walk up the steps of the Capitol to experience the U.S. Capitol – the government seems to think so.

Securitisn’t – Part 2 – the TSA

This is Part 2 of my asking the question about whether or not the highly visible security deterrents  are actually worth it, or just a pretend make you feel good effort..

Beyond physical moves, securitisn’t takes on other forms. Since my time as a photographer at the TCU Daily Skiff in Fort Worth, I’ve had a keen sensitivity to the right to be able to take photographs in public spaces, and of people, even if they may not necessarily want it. I never really had any run-ins, but again, since the mid-to-late nineties, there has been a snowball effect of where one cannot take photographs or video, often enforced by poorly informed police, security guards, or other officials.

Another WaPo article “Freedom of photography: Police, security often clamp down despite public right“ got me agitated on the photography front too. Basically, overzealous officers prevent people taking photographs inside such great places as Union Station in D.C. or in front of any of the brutalist Federal buildings in the city. (These buildings, it should be noted, are surrounded by jersey barriers, bollards, planters and portacabins for the officers).

Securitisn’t – Part 1

I’ve gone back and forth on this post a great deal, and in fact have been pondering it since late July, so, as one can imagine, the thinking is evolving as are my observations. This is primarily focused on D.C. and is Part 1 of 3.

Part 1.

Everyone’s been making up new words, truthiness, misunderestimated, and the portmanteau du jour – Refudiate. I’ve just come up with one – securitisn’t. Basically, since September 11, and before (incidents like Oklahoma City and the first WTC bomb), I’ve been asking the question about whether or not the highly visible security deterrents  are actually worth it, or just a pretend make you feel good effort.

At this point, I am a firm believer that the answer is the latter, that many of the most visual, intrusive and poorly aesthetic security devises are no good whatsoever. But my thinking has gone beyond just these minor annoyances to more intrusive and questionable security efforts, such as those exhibited by the slap-dash put together as a make you feel good agency, the Transportation Security Administration, part of the unwieldy Department of Homeland Security that was basically organized on the back of a napkin in the middle of the night in 43′s White House.

My feelings came to a crescendo on this issue when in May, a “security consultant,” recommended the doors of the Supreme Court of the United States be closed to people entering the building, and that visitors, lawyers and scholars should use the “tradesman’s entrance” around the side to get in – all of this while fundamentally undermining the words above the doors: Equal Justice Under Law.