Slashdot Mirror


The Hi-Tech Security at the Super Bowl

Hugh Pickens writes "As millions of fans sit glued to their sets next Sunday, one part of the game they will not see is the massive deployment of federal and local law enforcement resources to achieve what is being called the most technologically secure Super Bowl in history, an event that has been officially designated as a National Security Special Event (PDF). At the top of the list are gamma-ray cargo and vehicles scanners that can reportedly see through six inches of steel to reveal the contents of large vehicles. 'We can detect people, handguns and rifles,' says Customs and Border Protection Officer Brian Bell. 'You'd be a fool to bring something into that stadium that you shouldn't. We're going to catch it. Our goal is to look at every vehicle that makes a delivery inside the stadium and inside the secure perimeter.' Next is the 51-foot Featherlite mobile command center for disaster response that will support the newly constructed $18 million Regional Operations Center (ROC) for the Marion County Department of Homeland Security that will serve as a fusion center for coordinating the various federal agencies involved in providing security for the Super Bowl. One interesting security measure are the 'Swiveloc' explosion-proof manhole covers (video) that Indianapolis has spent $150,000 installing that are locked down during the Super Bowl. In case of an underground explosion, the covers lift a couple of inches off the ground — enough to vent gas out without feeding in oxygen to make an explosion bigger — before falling back into place. Finally the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI has installed a network of cameras that will be just a click away for government officials. 'If you had the right (Internet) address, you could set up a laptop anywhere and you could watch the camera from there,' says Brigadier General Stewart Goodwin."

22 of 265 comments (clear)

  1. Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know the terrorists have won when...

    1. Re:Fear by jo42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The terrorists won when America stopped being "the land of the free and the home of the brave" and became a bunch of fearful, fat, money grubbing, bible humping, limp-wristed namby pambies.

    2. Re:Fear by FridayBob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You know the terrorists have won when...

      Also:

      You know the establishment is winning when they've succeeded in using the fear of terrorism as an excuse to create the foundations of a police state...

  2. Meanwhile... by omganton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...budget cuts to space exploration. Good thing Football is safe.

    1. Re:Meanwhile... by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd rather have the 'terrorists' than this war on terror garbage.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re:Meanwhile... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Insightful

      its about protecting people if anything

      It's about fearmongering and harassing red-blooded law-abiding citizens, conditioning them to accept government intrusion into their lives, and making work for low-rent thugs while scores of teachers are being laid off.

      You are the one who's trolling. Since when in history has an American football game ever been subject to a terrorist attack? Note: a drunken fan who throws a plastic cup of beer at a rival team's fan is not a "lone wolf" terrorist no matter what the government tells you.

    3. Re:Meanwhile... by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the NFL feels its a target, then the fucking NFL can pay the bill.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Meanwhile... by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It isn't a war on Osama. It's war (well, not actual war as we haven't had one since WWII) on terror. As soon as terror signs a peace treaty with us and surrenders, we'll get back to all that stupid freedom garbage. Any day now, surely. Pick an enemy that you can fight indefinitely and have all the time in the world to shape the country as you see fit under the threat of "terror".

    5. Re:Meanwhile... by million_monkeys · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Thanks for the clarification. Excuse my ignorance, I am not a US citizen and don't know so much about this. I'm curious though: what difference does it make when the Congress declares war, other than symbolic?

      Apparently not a whole lot in practical terms. As you noted, we've attacked lots of countries without declaring war.

      The U.S. Constitution gives only Congress the power to declare war, but it doesn't specify the means of doing so or the effect of that declaration. So that's not particularly helpful. Since the early 1970s, there are strict limits on how long the president can commit forces without a declaration of war or 'authorization of force'. In the time since that law was passed, Congress has always opted for the authorization. There is a diplomatic difference as an authorization of force is perceived as less extreme. Whether there is any function difference, I don't know. An authorization of force has certainly been sufficient for us to attack a bunch of countries.

      So why the hang up over an actual declaration? I assume it's mostly a political issue. Undeclared conflicts have always been controversial, but lately it is being brought up more often due to Ron Paul trying to make it an issue in the upcoming presidental election. Americans who are tired of being at war - or tired of spending money to be at war - are picking up on it as well.

  3. Re:One question by sexconker · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hand egg.

  4. The FBI webcam network by supersat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    'If you had the right (Internet) address, you could set up a laptop anywhere and you could watch the camera from there,' says Brigadier General Stewart Goodwin."

    CHALLENGE ACCEPTED.

    Who sets this kind of thing up without any authentication?!

    1. Re:The FBI webcam network by Swanktastic · · Score: 5, Funny

      Brigadier General Stewart "Bareback" Goodwin

  5. Re:One question by Kenja · · Score: 4, Funny

    What happens is that two football clubs football at each other and the one that footballs the hardest wins at football. That and something about Michael Jackson's sisters nipple.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  6. Let's 'ope nobody tweets "destroy Super Bowl" by sehlat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or they'll cancel the 'ole bleedin' lot!

  7. Fuck all this by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Make the NFL foot this whole security bill.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  8. The manhole covers weren't for the stupidbowl. by mrmeval · · Score: 5, Informative

    They were because they KEEP EXPLODING!!!

    http://www.theindychannel.com/news/29819089/detail.html

    --
    I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    1. Re:The manhole covers weren't for the stupidbowl. by pnot · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you don't want your manhole to explode, stop eating vindaloo.

  9. Neckbeards, that's your cue by Beerdood · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Oh boy!" thought Milton, "A article on football! And not the soccer version, the American football kind!" He could barely contain his troll-citement. He never fully recovered from the traumatizing memories of high school where the sports jocks viciously bullied him, and this was a perfect opportunity to remind the world how stupid the concept of this sport was! He put his fingers together, pondering on what kind of "insightful" comment would get modded up by his fellow neck-beards. A reference to hand-egg and the stupidity of the name? Nah.. been done before.. Perhaps a comment on the overall barbaric nature of the sport and a jab to all the rednecks and jocks that enjoy it? Better.. but maybe...

    "Wait a minute..." he thought. "Maybe I should be contributing to the contents of the article? Perhaps I should mention how government funds shouldn't be involved here, but they'll be there anyway due to close ties between football and the military. Maybe something on security theater and a reference to airports and perhaps a lack of any terrorist related activities in football games?" But the thought quickly left his mind, as there was too much bitterness towards those jock types he worked with in marketing (and couldn't stand) and instead posted "HURRR maybe they should up the radiation on the metal detectors so the in-breed hicks that attend the game get sterilized!!"

    --
    Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
  10. Re:Meanwhile by turing_m · · Score: 4, Funny

    That would be a fowl deed.

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  11. Meanwhile...ROTCryingMEyesO by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Many of us are far too willing to sacrifice freedom for the illusion of security."

    It took some major editing, but I fixed that for you.

    "You're entitled to your own views. You are not entitled to force them on the majority."

    Clearly, that is exactly what a few people are allowed to do. And worse, they are allowed to throw the US Constitution out the window in the process.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  12. Re:Problem with dollar values. by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with numbers is that you're assigning them to a single arbitrary time period. The correct way of saying that would to spend $38b on ensuring those very people are safe at all times in all parts of their lives.

    If a hypothetical super bowl bombing doesn't occur then statistically several of your 10k people won't live to the end of the year anyway due to other problems. We spend ludicrous amounts of money against an unknown and unpredictable threat that is likely to affect only a minuscule percentage of our population, and given the current state of security is likely to remain a threat despite everyone's best efforts. All the while we can clearly see statistically people die every year and they don't get a dime spent on them.

    Take the $38bn and put it into some basic healthcare if you want return on investment, not fighting the maybe terrorists.

  13. Re:One question by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Funny

    No dude, sports are named after what they do the least during the game.

    Basket Ball - The ball is in the basket for only a very small portion of the game.
    Base Ball - The ball touches the base for only a very small portion of the game.
    Foot Ball - The ball touches the foot for only a very small portion of the game.

    Hand Egg would following this convention be Soccer, and only for the very short period of time where one team picks a fight with Manchester United and some poor striker ends up getting punched in the eggs.