Now if we can only get the doggies to sniff out false identification and stolen credit cards...

~;-D

Would it change your opinion if you knew that neither dogs nor the 'mechanical sniffers' can detect the TATP that was used in the London bombings?
TATP is a horrible explosive to work with, it tends to make a loud noise before the splodeydope intend, it degrades very quickly, too. The only reasons the splodeydopes like it are that it is made of easily available ingredients, it's simple, though dangerous, to make and the dogs can't find it.
Since the dogs can't find that particular popular explosive we have to use a combination of dogs and something else. We'll call that something else random searches although I question exactly how random they'll be. The kids still working the streets tell me that the Feebs have passed out some specific visual cues they've picked up that we will be looking for, as well as the 'instincts' of the experienced law enforcement officer. I'm really hoping this won't be the eeenie-meenie-miinie-moe crap that that those civilians with badges at the airports are pulling. Real LEOs can pick someone 'wrong' out of a crowd, almost at a glance. Trouble is, knowing someone is wrong isn't probable cause to arrest, search or even question. I would suggest that, no matter what the politicos are saying about random, the NYPD and NY Transit Police aren't going to be wasting a whole lot of time on people that they don't notice as wrong. The question is, what are the courts going to do with the dopers and assorted other malefactors that get caught up? Some of the cues are specific to a certain type of crime, others are generic. I doubt they'll be looking for little bitty things but the average doper is almost as smart as a ball peen hammer. I can see a lot of disgusted bluesuits flushing small amounts of dope down transit station toilets to avoid the time and paperwork of a piddleysh**t arrest.

You make many good points, Peter, and I hope you're right.