Thank you, I couldn't remember what colour it was.
I would go further, every little bit of vigilance makes it more difficult for those who are planning an act of terrorism. Each small check or inspection on its own may not seem to matter but add them all up and it will make a difference. It wont stop them, but everything you do to disrupt and discourage is a win.
It may "make attacks more difficult", but it also costs a lot and, funnily enough, most people would prefer not to have armed police everywhere, especially if it doesn't even prevent terrorist attacks!
Probably none, but that's not the point. These are bags that could be on the station for much of the day, at least unlike bags just left on platforms they aren't taken by the armed services and subject to a controlled explosion.
Why not? There's no point checking something for "suspicious items" just to appease the HSE/the DfT/voters/Big Brother (delete as appropriate), not least if something "of use" to a "malicious actor" has never been found in a bag attached to a bike, never will and thus searching them will do nothing to thwart an attack! It's purely safety for safety's sake.
It doesn't cost anything, these people are working anyway just carrying out the checks as part of their daily routine.
Armed bag searches ought to, othwerise they're not being done properly!
Causation or correlation? I don't have any evidence either way (and I'd love to see some), but my gut says it's probably more the latter.
Fair point and I bow to your supremacy.
Agreed. If, however, it requires susbtantial investment in staff and training, not to mention signage and the like, then it is worth it? Questions about one's right to not have everything of one's searched while using a public service abound, but sadly I'm not qualified to answer those.
I have seen drug sniffer dogs used a few times at Sheffield station.
Speaking purely logically, it makes no sense to only target bicycle panniers and ignore anything else which could easily house a bomb. If a terrorist wanted to use a bicycle to house a bomb they would be better packing the frame with explosives and using it as a pipe bomb. I suspect the reason this is being done is 1) Something must be done and this is something (i.e. an emotional reaction), and 2) Cyclists are a minority and any objections from them can be ignored. I wonder what the motoring lobby would say if it were suggested cars should be searched if their drivers are intending to park near what could be classified as potentially high risk terrorist targets.
Where are cars still being parked inside major stations?
They were at Crewe a couple of weeks ago.
So why aren't these proactive searches taking place across the board ?
I recall some years ago visiting a "potentially high risk terrorist target". The underside of my car was checked by mirror and a spaniel had a good sniff around, including interior and boot (doors of which had to be opened). And this was despite the fact that I was an identified attendee of an event so they knew who I was and why I was there.
The short stay parking at York, adjacent to Platforms 2 and 4
Crewe, Stoke & Stafford all have car parks adjacent to platforms (1, 2 & 1 respectively) there are loads of other examples They're certainly close enough to be effected if a bomb was in a car.
