"On the other hand, all kinds of adventurous schemes to add security checkpoints to subway and bus systems have been circulating since the London attacks. This is nonsense. No one can guaranty 100 percent security"
About this Quote
Panic loves architecture. Otto Schily’s blunt dismissal of post-attack “adventurous schemes” for transit checkpoints lands because it punctures the familiar political ritual: a spectacular act of violence, followed by a frantic search for visible countermeasures that look like control. His key move is rhetorical deflation. “Adventurous” sounds almost approving until he pairs it with “nonsense,” reframing innovation as improvisation - and improvisation as risk theater.
The context matters: after the London bombings, mass transit became the symbol of modern vulnerability because it’s open by design. Subways and buses are not airports; they are arteries. Treating them like terminals would mean bottlenecks, delays, and a permanent suspicion of the everyday commuter. Schily is arguing that the cost is not only financial but civic: once you normalize checkpoints in the spaces that make a city fluid, you train the public to accept friction and surveillance as the price of ordinary life.
The subtext is a warning about the politics of reassurance. Security measures that can’t plausibly cover every station, every entrance, every rush-hour surge don’t primarily stop attacks; they broadcast action. His line about “100 percent security” isn’t a truism so much as a rebuke to officials tempted to promise the impossible. By drawing a hard limit, Schily tries to shift the debate from performative control to proportional risk management - and to force an uncomfortable admission: a free, functioning city includes some exposure, and pretending otherwise is how democracies talk themselves into overreaction.
The context matters: after the London bombings, mass transit became the symbol of modern vulnerability because it’s open by design. Subways and buses are not airports; they are arteries. Treating them like terminals would mean bottlenecks, delays, and a permanent suspicion of the everyday commuter. Schily is arguing that the cost is not only financial but civic: once you normalize checkpoints in the spaces that make a city fluid, you train the public to accept friction and surveillance as the price of ordinary life.
The subtext is a warning about the politics of reassurance. Security measures that can’t plausibly cover every station, every entrance, every rush-hour surge don’t primarily stop attacks; they broadcast action. His line about “100 percent security” isn’t a truism so much as a rebuke to officials tempted to promise the impossible. By drawing a hard limit, Schily tries to shift the debate from performative control to proportional risk management - and to force an uncomfortable admission: a free, functioning city includes some exposure, and pretending otherwise is how democracies talk themselves into overreaction.
Quote Details
| Topic | Freedom |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Otto
Add to List


