Join 3,572 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Prohibited Items at the Presidential Inauguration
January 16, 2005 5:39 PM   Subscribe

Empty your pockets before attending the Presidential Inauguration. Among items forbidden are pocket tools, explosives, animals -- and in case they forgot to mention something, "any other items at the discretion of the security screeners that may pose a potential safety hazard"
posted by ThePrawn (50 comments total)

 
Even my Kazoo?
posted by Fupped Duck at 5:44 PM on January 16, 2005


We can't have people bringing things to the inauguration, like sharp objects ... or explosives ... or the truth.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:46 PM on January 16, 2005


> or explosives ... or the truth.

Oooh, the sting! The sting! Amazing how cutting a snark can be.

Seriously, what's new or unusual about this policy? If I remember correctly at Raiders games there is a sign saying something to the effect of "we can confiscate anything that we think to be a safety risk, even if it's not listed." That defeats people trying to bring in god-knows-what and getting all technical about whether a potato cannon is in fact a weapon or not.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 5:51 PM on January 16, 2005


thedevildancedlightly... a public servant has no business being scared of the public he's been entrusted to serve. That's my opinion, anyway.
posted by banished at 5:58 PM on January 16, 2005


"...is that a limp banana in your pocket or are you depressed to see the President?"
posted by alteredcarbon at 5:59 PM on January 16, 2005


a public servant has no business being scared of the public he's been entrusted to serve. That's my opinion, anyway.

How does your opinion make the public any less scary? I mean, have you seen those guys?
posted by kindall at 6:01 PM on January 16, 2005


I don't think you have to be "scared of the public" to not want guns and explosives at a public event.
posted by 23skidoo at 6:05 PM on January 16, 2005


I save my outrage for more substantive issues, like how Bush plans to destroy Social Security under the guise of "saving" it from its "imminent crisis."
posted by pmurray63 at 6:07 PM on January 16, 2005


kindall... it's more likely I'll be killed by Bush's draft than I will be by a terrorist...

23skidoo... terrorists don't follow rules. If something were going to happen, it's going to happen.
posted by banished at 6:14 PM on January 16, 2005


any other items at the discretion of the security screeners that may pose a potential safety hazard

Why do I have the feeling that any anti-Bush signs may turn out to be a much greater safety hazard than, for the sake of example, pro-Bush signs that might happen to be present? Hmm ... I wonder ...
posted by kaemaril at 6:15 PM on January 16, 2005


Sounds very reasonable in this situation.
posted by sled at 6:20 PM on January 16, 2005


a public servant has no business being scared of the public he's been entrusted to serve

yitzak rabin
posted by srboisvert at 6:21 PM on January 16, 2005


JFK
posted by CunningLinguist at 6:27 PM on January 16, 2005


Everyone eat beans. Lots of beans. We'll toot our protest, or smoke the screeners out in the process.
posted by fleener at 6:30 PM on January 16, 2005


Fleener, I can tell you, anything with "maltitol" in it (like many low-carb snack items) has a toot power vastly superior to that of beans--and lasts for hours, so you won't even have to try to sneak your Atkins chocolate bars into the events. To the diet-food snack aisle, America!
posted by emjaybee at 6:47 PM on January 16, 2005


We visited Washington under the Clinton administration and they were screening as we went into the Capitol Building, the Washington Monument, and other sites. The Capitol Building was memorable because it was there that my young daughter pulled a pocket knife out of her jeans that we didn't know she brought with her right in front of the screeners. My life passed in front of my eyes at that moment. Thankfully common sense prevailed and the object was handed to her dad. We wound up throwing it in a trash can later that day.

Look, whether you love Bush or hate him, the last thing this country needs is an assassination attempt.
posted by konolia at 6:52 PM on January 16, 2005


"Look, whether you love Bush or hate him, the last thing this country needs is an assassination attempt."

Exactly.

Do, or do not. There is no try.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:06 PM on January 16, 2005


a public servant has no business being scared of the public he's been entrusted to serve. That's my opinion, anyway.

I'm sure John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Anwar Sadat, Yitzhak Rabin, etc., etc., etc., etc. would share your opinion. Sorry, that ranks as one of the most hilarious comments I've read in a good long while.
posted by pardonyou? at 8:11 PM on January 16, 2005


mr crash davis was funnier, but he was trying.
posted by faceonmars at 8:15 PM on January 16, 2005


At least you don't have to sign a Bush endorsement to attend.
posted by Arch Stanton at 8:20 PM on January 16, 2005


There really is nothing surprising here, is there? Whatever you think of him, the position itself requires rings upon rings of security. I'd consider anyone lucky to get within 1k of him without a body-cavity search. It's a sad reality that public figures cannot be made accessible to the public if they are to live.

(Although looking at the money spent on Bush's entourage when he travels overseas, I'd be annoyed if I was paying for it. Almost 1000 people accompanying him...cooks, drivers, plus a few hundred security personnel.)

Despite the amusement factor of mr_crash's comment (what, no longer a rev_?), what makes you say that, konolia? What makes an assassination attempt the last thing America needs as opposed to all the other nasty things that can happen to a nation? (Just curious why you singled it out).

Yitzak, JFK, Rajiv Ghandi, Sadat...anyone at the top of the pyramid is an easy target. (On preview: what pardonyou? said)
posted by cosmonik at 8:20 PM on January 16, 2005


If I remember correctly at Raiders games...
why do the Raiders hate America?
posted by NationalKato at 8:25 PM on January 16, 2005


why do the Raiders hate America?
Why does America hate the Raiders?
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 8:50 PM on January 16, 2005


Why does America hate the Raiders?
Why do I hate thedevildandedlightly?
posted by item at 8:56 PM on January 16, 2005


I still think we could save a lot of money and eliminate a lot of risks by holding a nice, small, but heavily televised ceremony in the Rose Garden. Considering the current health of the Chief Justice, I think this idea has even more merit.
posted by ilsa at 9:23 PM on January 16, 2005


Don't think anyone has mentioned it yet, but counter-inaugural.org has a list of "alternative" events and protests. Most of the people there are probably counting on being arrested anyway, so I'm not sure they're too in to the dos/dont's.

By the way, one group is looking for a few good Jesuses. You know, if there are any Jesuses here.
posted by mudpuppie at 9:38 PM on January 16, 2005


This fascinating press release was supplemented extraordinarily by links to such places as , uhhh, leatherman.com.
posted by The God Complex at 9:47 PM on January 16, 2005


I think George Bush is a worthless president in most respects. At the same time i'm not flying into a rage because someone can't bring a pocket knife to the inauguration. Or a potato cannon, or a condom filled with ketchup. This should be standard for any president.
posted by Dean Keaton at 9:48 PM on January 16, 2005


Dean Keaton - no condoms filled with ketchup? So they're catering for everyone, then? Otherwise that'll be hard to police if you combine the components after the screening.
posted by cosmonik at 9:55 PM on January 16, 2005


condom filled with ketchup

aka a condiment condom.
posted by mudpuppie at 10:07 PM on January 16, 2005


Why does America hate the Raiders?

Because they blow and we only like winners?
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:41 PM on January 16, 2005


aka a condiment condom

aka a condoment
posted by thecaddy at 11:45 PM on January 16, 2005


Oh great!! Another America Hating Condoment.
posted by Balisong at 12:56 AM on January 17, 2005


I remember when Bush visited my town and that whole "whatever-safety-hazard" rule applied. Apparently, Kerry stickers were safety hazards. I supported Kerry, but regardless, one doesn't get to see the Prez often and I thought it would be a good event to cover for my campus paper. Couldn't even get a ticket to the Bush rally--Republican town leaders were picking people out of the line that had anything that wasn't pro-Bush.

So I suppose... they can pretend you'll kill someone with your pro-choice/pro-gay-marriage/whatever bumper sticker and kick your tushy out. Anything goes. In the pictures on the news, expect to see millions of happy Bush lovers in the crowds.
posted by sian at 1:04 AM on January 17, 2005


Party over here! : seems someone got a permit to have bleachers set up on 4th and Pennsylvania, along the parade route. their friends are joining them, too! oh, you know where you wanna be when this goes down...
posted by NationalKato at 2:43 AM on January 17, 2005


The first bush admin maintained second amendment-related rights for, you know, foreign terrorists. Apparently he trusts his domestic crowd lots less. How is this in any way anywhere near "normal"?
posted by magullo at 6:00 AM on January 17, 2005


Are these security measures really so much different from the measures taken for say, the Clinton inaugurations?
posted by orange swan at 6:18 AM on January 17, 2005


orange swan, the security for this event is unprecedented, according to even such fair and balanced sources as fox news.
posted by u.n. owen at 7:13 AM on January 17, 2005


umbrellas

Lets hope it doesn't rain.

strollers

Those damn two year olds can walk on their own two legs.

sticks

And no comedy schtick, either!
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:51 AM on January 17, 2005


it was there that my young daughter pulled a pocket knife out of her jeans that we didn't know she brought with her right in front of the screeners. My life passed in front of my eyes at that moment. Thankfully common sense prevailed and the object was handed to her dad. We wound up throwing it in a trash can later that day.

It seems to me that common sense would be that a ten-year old isn't going to stab hell out of Newt, and leave the pocket knife be.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:05 AM on January 17, 2005


but five fresh fish, Al Qaeda and those pesky terr'ists are actively recruiting!
posted by NationalKato at 10:32 AM on January 17, 2005


Actively recruiting in Congress! My god, Bush had better lob a nuke at that place, make it safe for democracy!
posted by five fresh fish at 10:52 AM on January 17, 2005


Hey! No fair giving Bush ideas, Mr. Fish!
posted by kaemaril at 5:02 PM on January 17, 2005


i actually think they should be on the lookout for angry vets home from Iraq, but how to distinguish them from the average Bush supporter?
posted by amberglow at 5:09 PM on January 17, 2005


Are these security measures really so much different from the measures taken for say, the Clinton inaugurations?

Yes, because for the first time in history the federal inauguration is (involuntarily) pulling money out of the city's local funds.
posted by NortonDC at 5:56 PM on January 17, 2005


orange swan, the security for this event is unprecedented, according to even such fair and balanced sources as fox news.

And the overt hatred for this president is unprecedented. Seems to me like the increase is commensurate with the threat.
posted by pardonyou? at 6:51 PM on January 17, 2005


Care to explain away the pillaging of the city's treasury, pardonyou?
posted by NortonDC at 6:59 PM on January 17, 2005


Hang on... You'll have to forgive an ignorant Aussie, but isn't this President a fan of guns? Surely the NRA will be arguing for people's right to bear arms at the inauguration? No?

On behalf of the rest of the world, is there any chance you guys to organise to have President Bartlet sworn in instead?
posted by bangalla at 7:23 PM on January 17, 2005


Care to explain away the pillaging of the city's treasury, pardonyou?

No. Wasn't addressing who should pay for it. Just that it's a little disingenous to be shocked, shocked! that they are taking unprecedented security measures. When a small but not insignificant percentage of the country thinks the president is the embodiment of evil, it's not unreasonable to be concerned that he could be attacked.
posted by pardonyou? at 8:13 AM on January 18, 2005


pardonyou: Not that small, I'm thinking.
posted by kaemaril at 2:45 PM on January 18, 2005


« Older Chika Honda, falsely imprisoned for ten years by A...   |   Na├»ve in Thailand:... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments