Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Superbowl Means Time For Spy Cams, Hazmat Squads and Bomb-Sniffing Dogs

Posted by timothy on from the it-is-time-to-cheer-citizen dept.

Toe, The writes "The New York Police Department has quietly installed about 200 temporary surveillance cameras in midtown Manhattan to help spot trouble along 'Super Bowl Boulevard,' a 13-block street fair on Broadway that's expected to draw large crowds during the windup to the game. The temporary cameras for the Super Bowl festivities will supplement a system of thousands of permanent cameras covering midtown and Wall Street that the NYPD monitors from a command center in lower Manhattan. The department has pioneered analytical software that allows it to program the cameras to detect suspicious activity, such as a bag or other objects left in one place for a long time. Hazmat and bomb squads will be on standby. Others officers will patrol with bomb-sniffing dogs. Still more will watch from rooftops and from police helicopters. At a recent security briefing at the stadium, police chiefs and other officials said success will be measured in part by how well authorities conceal all the concern over potential threats." Now it's a proven tradition: Superbowl crowds are a good place to test people-watching gear.

75 comments

  1. "Temporary" by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Temporary until they decide they really like them.

    1. Re:"Temporary" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is no temporary. We have always been at war with The Terrorists.

    2. Re:"Temporary" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      href="http://www.iraqeaa.net

      http://www.iraqna-love.com

    3. Re:"Temporary" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      With all the ridiculous security required for major events like the Superbowl, New Years eve in Times Square, marathons, Olympics, I'm starting to think that we are only a few years away from the day when spectators will no longer be allowed to attend. The events will be staged for television audiences only. The police will decided that having so many people all congregate in one place is just too high of a security threat.

    4. Re:"Temporary" by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, they're one upping Orwell and successfully framing it as a new thing. In airports they say "Due to heightened security..." implying security is higher than normal at airports despite the fact that it has been that way for a decade and will never decrease. The national security level system had lower levels of threats on it, but pretty clearly no one ever intended to tell the public they were finally safe and could stop funding the military industrial complex.

      With a conflict that has always been going on, people will accept it. But they'll be apathetic about it too, so you can get less money out of it.

    5. Re:"Temporary" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aww, this was a perfect opportunity to lug out "you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means". ;)

  2. Superbowl is Bread And Circus Day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The Circus must be protected from distractions.

    1. Re:Superbowl is Bread And Circus Day by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      Exactly!

      Welfare = bread
      College and pro sports = circuses

      Before much longer everyone in the country will be in the "low information voter" category. Idiocracy wasn't just a funny movie; it was a documentary about our future. Is there time to change course? No, we passed that point several decades ago. The best one can do now is ride out the bad times and hope for better times after all the shit is over.

  3. I refuse to go for this very reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and no tickets.

    1. Re: I refuse to go for this very reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why we can't have nice things. The police ruin everything.

  4. JUst Curious by rmdingler · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Since the location of each Superbowl is typically known years in advance,

    why would some terrorist have to set up the big fireworks anywhere near the day of the game?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:JUst Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They wouldn't, and they haven't, because there are no terrorists. The police are fear mongering scum.

    2. Re:JUst Curious by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      Well the earlier you put something like that in place the greater the chance someone happens upon it before the main event so to speak.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    3. Re:JUst Curious by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 5, Informative

      Explosives, especially homemade explosives, degrade over time and with exposure to moisture and weather. So do control electronics, and organic poisons. The stability of C4 is the exception, rather than the rule. Documented cases of old mines and artillery going off at unexpected times are common in the aftermath of military conflicts around the world. Maintenance in buildings that large, occupied by the pubic on a frequent basis, absolutely require maintenance crews to do thorough inspections to avoid collections of far more mundane materials. Some of the relevant regulations can be found at http://www.fifa.com/mm/documen....

    4. Re:JUst Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People wanting to cause terror know it is the best time of the year to leave explosive residues (/birdpoop/fireworks), Cheap backpacks filled with wires, and walk arround the street with a skimask or other disguises.

      Police will create the terror for you, while you did not do anything actually wrong.

      (Warning: I am not sure if you can see superbowl in a police accomodation )

    5. Re:JUst Curious by LMariachi · · Score: 1

      You could acquire a concrete manufacturer and bake explosives into construction long ahead of time, like when a new football stadium is being built five years ago

    6. Re:JUst Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I was a terrorist all that would be necessary is to fly a drone over the stadium and detonate it. Just launch it from a nearby rooftop so the time to react is too short and make your escape while law enforcement scurries around like frightened children carrying automatic weapons. Oh yeah I feel so much safer with the police armed as though they're in Afghanistan.

    7. Re:JUst Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bane, is that you?

    8. Re:JUst Curious by timeOday · · Score: 2

      On the news they showed Russian police near the Olympics pulling up man-hole covers to inspect the sewers. So they are mindful of that kind of thing.

    9. Re:JUst Curious by z0rt · · Score: 2

      Who he is doesn't matter. What matters is his plan.

  5. Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by rmdingler · · Score: 3, Insightful
    When that source of evil dries up,

    some other group will pop up to unite our hatred until our eyesight is clouded.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can a completely fabricated nonexistent source of evil ever dry up?

    2. Re:Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Completely fabricated non-existent? Well, that's just the other side of the coin of how hyped up the threat is.

    3. Re:Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it won't dry up, but the terms will change when the old ones no longer scare people. For instance, from the 1870s to 1920s, it was "anarchists" in America.

    4. Re:Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      We'll go back to pedophiles, or maybe communists or witches. Or better yet, we can go back to the 80's and be afraid of pedophile witch communes sacrificing children (which do not have to be proven to have ever existed in the first place) to Satan. Now those were the good ol' days; that was an irrational fear you could really get behind. Some of those people are still in prison - real prison, not that pussy Guantanamo crap - based solely on the testimony of preschoolers that were interrogated for 12+ hours at a time and fed leading questions. Just let it slip to the local pastor about how rock music was encoding messages backwards and *BLAM*, ten people arrested for accusations made by the congregation and convicted on confessions beaten out of them with phone books. Sure, we have waterboarding now, but it's just not the same. I want to see character assassination, not just regular assassination. If you don't break them before killing them, then where's the fun in that?

      Too bad that Janet Reno isn't in the Capitol anymore. It's a sign of the moral decay that the country is in since we stopped lynching the gays and blacks.

    5. Re: Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by alen · · Score: 2

      So who was it in the 80's hijacking planes and killing elderly Americans on Italian cruise ships?

    6. Re:Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by flyneye · · Score: 2

      Well, we don't hear "Disco Duck " on the radio anymore, perhaps someone has a nonexistant source of evil dryer.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    7. Re:Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by Guest316 · · Score: 1

      No no no, the previous prez said it quite plainly. It's tourists who are the problem.

    8. Re: Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by supersat · · Score: 1

      Well, that explains things like US-VISIT and ESTA. The US government has become increasingly hostile to tourists.

    9. Re:Temporarily, it's the Terrorists by davester666 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to even go that far. We're already going after on-line avatars of dead people. We can keep that going forever.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  6. THANK JEBUS FOR THE NYPD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I can flash my tits in safety!

    1. Re:THANK JEBUS FOR THE NYPD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please no manboobs. We ac's can see them in the mirror every day.

  7. Rock and a hard place... by Jamlad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In their defense they're caught between a rock and a hard place. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. So they're just covering their asses, like any employee. If they don't step up "security" they'll be lampooned for inaction and complacency, if they do install cameras and add extra patrols they get call "fear-mongers" and "fascists". But the professional cost of not adding extra security, particularly in light of an (highly unlikely) attack, is greater than if they don't.

    1. Re:Rock and a hard place... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Funny

      . Damned if they do, damned if they don't. So they're just covering their asses, like any employee

      So, you are saying the road to hell is paved with covered asses?

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:Rock and a hard place... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming they actually care about pleasing the people shouting "fear-mongers" and "fascists".

    3. Re:Rock and a hard place... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In their defense they're caught between a rock and a hard place. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. So they're just covering their asses, like any employee.

      If they don't step up "security" they'll be lampooned for inaction and complacency, if they do install cameras and add extra patrols they get call "fear-mongers" and "fascists". But the professional cost of not adding extra security, particularly in light of an (highly unlikely) attack, is greater than if they don't.

      No, I'd say the crushing weight of an overly oppressive government hell-bent on taxing us to death with FUD (mixed in with a few lies to keep the hype going) is the true greater cost, considering what it feels like to be "free" these days.

      I fear no foreign faceless terrorist directly. I fear named, titled, domesticated ones far more.

  8. that lists goes on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1920-1980 was communism.... Then when that feel apart and was never a threat, [the irony being the economics of communism seemed to be more of a "free market' in someways.

    You could add a bunch of other non-existent threats from groups/citizens born in the country in between those times.

    Oh yeah the always amusing 'war on drugs' from the late 1980's thru today...

  9. What I really want to know is who is paying by DarkOx · · Score: 2

    Are local tax payers footing the bill for the enhanced police presence? Is every America paying to have TSA goons and FBI thugs swarming about? Or are the NFL and TV broadcasters picking up at least some of the tab?

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:What I really want to know is who is paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the difference? If the NFL and TV networks are paying for this shit, we still pay in the end when they raise ticket prices and raise cable TV bills.

      The solution is to cut back "law enforcement" to just above bare necessity levels. Law enforcement officials who demonstrate they are not simply goons who are out to push everyone else around may be afforded more than bare minimum resources in their quest to actually prevent and solve real crime.

    2. Re:What I really want to know is who is paying by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Well, as the NFL is classified as a not-for-profit business, I'm gonna go with one (or a combination) of the first two.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:What I really want to know is who is paying by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Yes, tax payers cover the costs. And they are significant. New Jersey (where the superbowl isn't even happening) is spending something like $20m just to accommodate extra transportation for the super bowl. Nobody will give exact numbers, so they all just say that the revenue brought in from visitors during the super bowl should offset the cost to the taxpayers. I'm not sure how that works, since if *I* pay *my* taxes and *my* taxes cover the cost of the super bowl transportation, security, amenities, and so on and then some diner and hotel downtown rakes in money from the extra business... how that benefits me or compensates me as a tax-payer.

    4. Re:What I really want to know is who is paying by RoccamOccam · · Score: 2

      New Jersey (where the superbowl isn't even happening) is spending something like $20m just to accommodate extra transportation for the super bowl.

      Umm ... This year's Superbowl will be played in MetLife Stadium at the Meadowlands Sports Complex in East Rutherford, New Jersey.

    5. Re:What I really want to know is who is paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of those people are paying sales taxes, hotel taxes, etc. Plus those business are paying taxes on the additional income. In theory they'll pay more $20 million in taxes to cover the costs for the event. Whether it actually works out that way, I don't know.

    6. Re:What I really want to know is who is paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... so they all just say that the revenue brought in from visitors during the super bowl should offset the cost to the taxpayers.

      Thats the excuse they used in Indianapolis, when the Super Bowl was there in 2012. The city's taxpayers got screwed into having to pay to build the new stadium, and many companies lost money due to there being no "economic boost". Oh, and there were measles outbreaks too, thanks to anti-vax idiots running around the city!

    7. Re:What I really want to know is who is paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the NFL Fleeces Taxpayers

      Taxpayers fund the stadiums, antitrust law doesn't apply to broadcast deals, the league enjoys nonprofit status, and Commissioner Roger Goodell makes $30 million a year. It's time to stop the public giveaways to America's richest sports league—and to the feudal lords who own its teams.

  10. Welcome to your police state by FuzzNugget · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I mean, holy shit, when police are smothering every angle of a peaceful gathering just in case by default, that's when you know it.

    America has had it so good for so long that one act of mass violence happens and they lose their shit (not to mention their rights). There are other countries where such things have historically been the norm, yet haven't resorted to police state tactics.

    Has anyone up there even stopped for a moment to think that, just maybe, this is a self-fulfilling prophecy? That all the rights-abridging, war-mongering, imperialistic atrocities committed by America's for-the-government-by-the-government system in the name of "spreading democracy" (AHAHAHAHAHAHA...) is causing certain people to react in such an extreme manner? Or am I being too naive in thinking that they haven't considered this and decided they want it this way?

    1. Re:Welcome to your police state by Seumas · · Score: 2

      And the 100,000+ at the event will gladly accept it, because "better safe than sorry" and "you gotta give up a little freedom and convenience for security durp durp".

      Even if that were true... all these resources to protect so many of the most disposable.

    2. Re:Welcome to your police state by DerekLyons · · Score: 1, Funny

      America has had it so good for so long that one act of mass violence happens

      Oklahoma City, Boston, Aurora.... One act? I just counted three, and I'm not even halfway through my first cup of coffee.
       

      Or am I being too naive in thinking that they haven't considered this and decided they want it this way?

      No, you just need to adjust your tinfoil chapeau, it's a little tight and the resulting lack of bloodflow to the brain is causing hallucinations.

    3. Re:Welcome to your police state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does Slashdot and a bunch of loud mouth civil libertarians want the terrorists to succeed and are telling them about all the different ways to avoid detection? Do they want to see us harmed? Are they just that selfish that they don't care if others are killed, just so they get to keep a few dollars more a year?

      I will enjoy placing the blame for the next attack when it happens on Snowden and his supporters.

  11. Well of course. They have to make sure that by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 3, Funny

    the fans coming in from Washington and Colorado didn't bring any weed with them....

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  12. Of course the UK still has the 'most CCTV' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right? So it's also time to trot out that iffy bit of research to warn of how you 'might' become like the perfidious UK.

  13. Superbowl??? by Chewbacon · · Score: 0

    What the fuck is a superbowl? Is that like the Super Bowl?

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    1. Re:Superbowl??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck is a superbowl? Is that like the Super Bowl?

      Maybe it's a Superb Owl?

  14. A "superbowl" is what gets packed by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 2

    when the 2 states that recently legalized weed meet for a championship football game...

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  15. you almost dont notice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They had the same thing in Indianapolis when the game was there - even a snipers nest or two in the stadium...as featured in the Indy Star in the days after the game...

    You never noticed all the security walking down the streets...it was fine...and all the security went away on Monday when the game was done...The NFL has a good handle on this

  16. That's what allowing muslims free reign brings you by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    They are "free" to terrorise with their human rights protected and sod everyone else

  17. obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Terrorists Have Won"

  18. Superbowl? You mean the "Big Game"? by nolife · · Score: 2

    You can't use the word Superbowl or even Super Sunday without the NFL wanting some money. People have been calling it the the "Big Game", although the NFL is now trying to trademark that term as well.
    http://www.techdirt.com/articl...

    Unless you pay the NFL money, if the NFL has their way, we might have to call it
    "that game that happens at the end of the season that determines the champion in the sport that uses the brown oblong ball in the US"

    --
    Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
  19. Re:Superbowl? You mean the "Big Game"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you watch the game on a screen of more than 55 inches and/or have more than 4 speakers in any one room, you are technically violating section 100 of the US copyright law. So.. If you have a 5+1 or more surround system, you are in violation.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/usc...

    Laws written and funded by campaign contributions (bribes) by a lobbyist. Our corrupt government at work.

  20. Re:Superbowl? You mean the "Big Game"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They don't have a trademark on "Superbowl", because it's "Super Bowl" according to your reference. Then again, your link also doesn't match up with your hyperbole. Advertisers can't use "Super Bowl" without the NFL getting involved.

  21. Fuck American Football by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Fuck this shit it's not real football, just a bunch of homos touching each others asses and stopping every ten seconds to catch their breath because they are pussies.

    1. Re:Fuck American Football by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see we have a "girly man" expressing outrage.

  22. Re:Superbowl? You mean the "Big Game"? by turp182 · · Score: 1

    Just call it the Handegg Bowl.

    http://www.augmentedplanet.com...

    --
    BlameBillCosby.com
  23. Yawn by Animats · · Score: 1

    The Super Bowl was at Stanford once, in 1985. The local attitude was "yawn". Nobody cared. I was on the Stanford campus at the time, but on the other side of campus at the time, and it had zero impact over there.

  24. Superbowl FALSE FLAG terrorist event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you believe this web page, the NSA are planning a FALSE FLAG terrorist attack at the Superbowl:
    http://americandictators.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/breaking-news-superbowl-false-flag.html

  25. Re:Superbowl? You mean the "Big Game"? by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't the use of "The Big Game" by Cal & Stanford for *their* football game since 1900 interfere with that?

    --
    Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
  26. How the NFL Fleeces Taxpayers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How the NFL Fleeces Taxpayers http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/

  27. Re:That's what allowing muslims free reign brings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't decide which is more disgusting: your blatant bigotry or your improper use of the word 'reign'. You should be ashamed of yourself, and I'm sure you would be if you were capable of it.

  28. FBI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, if there happens to be a fire in the place, the FBI will be there to mow down the fleeing public with gun fire.

  29. Re:That's what allowing muslims free reign brings by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    I can't decide which is more disgusting: your blatant bigotry or your improper use of the word 'reign'. You should be ashamed of yourself, and I'm sure you would be if you were capable of it.

    I apologies for the misuse of "reign", and thanks I did not realise that "free rein" and "free reign" have different meanings. On the other matter if you consider it bigoted to point out that a group who are obliged to convert or subdue and use terrorist activities are to blame for increased security - then I'm glad that you weren't in government during WWII.

  30. Advance notice by linuxsurfer · · Score: 1

    It's a good thing we put this information on a public website. That way anybody who wants to cause havoc knows what systems to bypass.