What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

LynahFan said:
Also, note that roadblocks to "search" for specific crimes (such as DWI or illegal immigrants) have been found to be legal, even though no standard of reasonable suspicion has been met in those cases.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I've always been under the assumption they are illegal unless optional. It clearly violates the fourth amendment.

Edit: Looks like they violate Minnesota's Constitution. Curiously though, they apparently don't violate the 4th. Which boggles my mind.
 
Last edited:
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

leswp1 said:
Wondering if the backlash may be from some of the vast majority of folks who have no problem with the new policy (I saw some stat that said 81% were OK with it) and get behind the people who are 'opting out'. I predict bloodshed somewhere today from a person delayed who doesn't agree with the opt out thing and misses a connection.

What ever happened to intelligent discourse on things? Now everything is either absolutely horrifying or perfect. No one seems to be able to see the middle road.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem is we left the middle of the road about 4 security measures back. I don't think anyone has a problem with metal detectors. But then it was the shoes, and then laptops, and then liquids, now we get virtually stripped and/or groped.

At some point you have to draw the line. Frankly it probably should've been drawn a few steps back, but whatever.

The 81% number is flawed - it's from one CBS poll taken before most people knew what the new measures were going to be. The question was something like "do you support increased security through the use of body scanners?"

The more recent one by the Washington Post is still shockingly high - I think 63% still support the new measures, though an 18% drop in the span of 2 weeks is huge. It'll be interesting to see a poll next week after all the holiday travel this weekend.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

XYZ said:
Or they could shoot up a mall in a random smaller town about once every six weeks. Think DC sniper on a grand scale. In terms of instilling fear in the populace that would work wonders.
Click to expand...

Do that sometime between Black Friday and December 10 and watch the US retail economy die. What percentage of retail revenue is collected from the Christmas season? 25%?

You don't have to cause much damage; just write the headline and CNN and Fox will do the rest of your work for you.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

dxmnkd316 said:
Are you sure? I've always been under the assumption they are illegal unless optional. It clearly violates the fourth amendment.
Click to expand...

Nope. So long as they're fixed and they stop everyone (they don't have to test/question everyone, just stop them momentarily to peak in then send 'em on their way), they're permitted. I think it's a crappy ruling, but there it is.

The difference here, in my opinion, is that this goes above and beyond that. Those checkpoints are less invasive than your average Terry stop frisking - these are clearly more invasive than the frisking involved in a Terry stop. I again go back to the point that currently TSA agents get to do more to you than a corrections officer or a police officer. How can that ever be considered reasonable?
 
Last edited:
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

All this supposed "security" is a joke, a waste of time, and a tremendous waste of money. Look, there are some crazy, mo$$erfu**ing psychopaths out there. Whether they are cooking up prostitutes in Milwaukee, walking into a school in Littleton, Colorado or flying planes into the World Trade Towers, they exist. No amount of education, handholding, coddling or x-ray machines are going to make a difference. You just have to hope you're not around when they go off. If you are, tough luck for you.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

I just read the majority opinion by Rehnquist. Essentially he says that the need to keep drunk drivers off the road and the effectiveness of the program supercedes the fourth amendment. Cute.

Edit: Add to that, he thinks that this is only a minor intrusion on the 4th amendment and apparently that makes it ok.
 
Last edited:
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

WeWantMore said:
Get ready for scanners on buses, trains, and boats as well.
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...scanners-could-be-trains-boats-and-the-metro-
Click to expand...

When I brought that article up the ad was for the NG Global Hawk. It was like "this policy of fear brought to you by its beneficiaries."

At some point, some statesman is going to stand up and say, "if we are free we are at risk," and it won't be some self-serving fig leaf about lowering capital gains taxes. The problem we face is the War Fever problem -- during the initial run up to a war the testosterone-heads always win the day by screaming and threatening to bust heads. "For the common good," of course. :rolleyes: With the war on terror, War Fever is perpetual, and the screamers will always be able to intimidate the politicians by saying "as soon as something happens, it will be your fault unless you (next Gestapo measure here)". There's a great quote from, I dunno, maybe Thucydides, about a jingoist run up to war and how it melts people's brains like an infection, "prudence was seen as cowardice, deliberation as vacillation," or something like that. The whole notion so unnervingly apt for recent history that we can't listen to those pointy-head elitists, it's the he-men who will protect us. These colors don't run.

Yeah. How'd that work out?

Are there enough grown-ups to stop that? There never have been to stop a war; the only thing that leads to an anti-war movement is exhaustion and the realization that the "honor" and "glory" of battle are just cheap sloganeering.
 
Last edited:
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

unofan said:
Well, your screen name is apropos, since your post indicates you're one giant chickens*** who's scared of the boogeyman.
Click to expand...

I'm not scared of the friggin scanner and then refuse the pat downs. I'm not scared to fly (it's safer than driving anyways, but that's besides the point). If you do the right things in the first place and you will have nothing to worry about. I'm just thinking people are blowing this out of proportion. If something like another attack happened, the other side of the coin would be blowing it out of proportion. People just need to learn to shut up and deal.

EDIT: Ask mookie, my name is because of a pair of slipper I used to own.

EDIT 2: Maybe I did come into this convo a little late, I just think people in this country are a bunch of whiny brats so if something doesn't go their way, they will make a huge fuss and stink about it. If there was racial profiling, it would make the news. If something is slightly worse than someone would like, its going to be a problem and its going to make the news. The problem isn't the majority of people, the problem is the 1% that make it way more of a problem than it really is, the other 1% that posts it online, then the media outrage/ online viral responses from people who don't have any idea of what actually happened, and that then turns into the issue we have today. People need to learn to shut the f up.
 
Last edited:
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

I used to subscribe to the theory that if you have nothing to hide than you have nothing to worry about. While I still think that is true in general, I don't like using it as a defense for the government intruding on the rights of the people.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

dxmnkd316 said:
I just read the majority opinion by Rehnquist. Essentially he says that the need to keep drunk drivers off the road and the effectiveness of the program supercedes the fourth amendment. Cute.

Edit: Add to that, he thinks that this is only a minor intrusion on the 4th amendment and apparently that makes it ok.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly the precedent that the courts will use when ruling on the scanners. One drunk driver in a car can kill, what, 20-30 people, tops? *If* you buy the court's argument on that, then it's easy to see how protecting the safety of an airplane is "worth" even more intrusion than a drunk driver check.

(Just looked it up. The worst drunk driving accident in the US apparently killed 27 people on a church bus in Carrolton, KY.)
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

I just don't buy into the notion that we should give up our Constitutional rights because someone might die at the hands of a drunk driver. Maybe my feelings would change if I was personally affected by it, but it doesn't change the fact that roadblocks are a "permitted infringement" on the Fourth Amendment.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

dxmnkd316 said:
I just don't buy into the notion that we should give up our Constitutional rights because someone might die at the hands of a drunk driver. Maybe my feelings would change if I was personally affected by it, but it doesn't change the fact that roadblocks are a "permitted infringement" on the Fourth Amendment.
Click to expand...
Only "unreasonable" searches are prohibited by the constitution, which implies that there exist such things as a reasonable searches. One man's infringement is another man's reasonable search - it just comes down to definitions and interpretations.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

LynahFan said:
Only "unreasonable" searches are prohibited by the constitution, which implies that there exist such things as a reasonable searches. One man's infringement is another man's reasonable search - it just comes down to definitions and interpretations.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. In my opinion, the government shouldn't have any right to search me, my house, or my possessions unless I explicitly give them permission, there is probable cause, or they have a warrant. A roadblock doesn't satisfy these conditions. It would be like cops patrolling the city knocking on the door and telling someone they have to allow them in the house to search for illicit drugs. If they don't comply, it gives them probable cause to search the house. I don't get how anyone doesn't see the problem in that. You don't allow the government to search you, it gives them the right to search you. Backasswards.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

LynahFan said:
(Just looked it up. The worst drunk driving accident in the US apparently killed 27 people on a church bus in Carrolton, KY.)
Click to expand...

They did, however, go to heaven.

Except the girl in seat 2B. She was bi.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

Chickens@NU said:
I just think people in this country are a bunch of whiny brats so if something doesn't go their way, they will make a huge fuss and stink about it.
Click to expand...

What else are you supposed to do in a situation like this? The gov't is imposing a policy that is worthless and likely violates the Constitution, at least in spirit if not form. Silence as acceptance isn't an option; that merely encourages them to keep doing **** like this. The fact that the poll numbers aren't skewed by political affiliation should tell you something. This isn't an "OMG OBAMA SUXORS!!!!111!!" moment, but a "the gov't ****ed off the populace" moment.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

dxmnkd316 said:
I completely agree. In my opinion, the government shouldn't have any right to search me, my house, or my possessions unless I explicitly give them permission, there is probable cause, or they have a warrant. A roadblock doesn't satisfy these conditions. It would be like cops patrolling the city knocking on the door and telling someone they have to allow them in the house to search for illicit drugs. If they don't comply, it gives them probable cause to search the house. I don't get how anyone doesn't see the problem in that. You don't allow the government to search you, it gives them the right to search you. Backasswards.
Click to expand...

I'll play devil's advocate. The house isn't moving. A car is not just passive property, it's a potential menace. By being a licensed driver, you are giving consent to be checked for being drunk while driving (a violation of your license). You are not a licensed house resident -- you can get as drunk as you want in your living room and nobody will bother you.
 
Re: Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

dxmnkd316 said:
I just don't buy into the notion that we should give up our Constitutional rights because someone might die at the hands of a drunk driver. Maybe my feelings would change if I was personally affected by it, but it doesn't change the fact that roadblocks are a "permitted infringement" on the Fourth Amendment.
Click to expand...

While I have not posted on this, I feel compelled to be real devils advocate.

Would it help that the inspectors represent the airlines, and not the TSA? That way we know for sure that the rules are set to protect private coporation- ones that are not funded by the goverment. We've already given up the right to bear arms on a plane- but I also have for work (can't have guns on the property), or fun (can have guns at a hockey game); we've given up rights to drink (can't have those at work), given up rights to privacy- work can do some check to see if we are worthy. Given up a LOT of first amedment rights at work- tons of those.

I honestly don't like what so ever. But I also see that United, Delta, and Southwest are not governmet agencies. Happens that the TSA is.

So I'll go back to the original question- would it be better if the ones doing the searches actually represented the airlines?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top