Take a Stand Against Sexual Assault: Resist the TSA

[sagard]

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

Can I assume you're looking forward to the day they begin searching body cavities? Because it will come just as soon as some Islamist tries it. Enjoy.

I'm going to hope that some day common sense will take over. Israel looks to me like they have the right model. Hiring intelligent competent people to due a thourough job and not waste millions of hours a year.

http://www.staplenews.com/home/2010...-of-airports-high-security-little-bother.html

I don't think I had a single person look me in the eye in four flights over the last month.

 

[Scott W]

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

It is her right to give up, to be honest it is none of your business. She is not speaking for anyone else or saying you have to do the same, but if she wants to and chooses o than the terrorists have NOT won. She is exercising her rights as an American...that is what this country is supposed to be all about. The terrorists dont want us free thinking, they want us group thinking because the group is way more dangerous and destructive than the individual. Group think nearly destroyed the Bill of Rights post 9/11, group think is why there is never change in Washington no matter who is in power. Group think is the true enemy of Democracy.

Nothing to be sad about man, you should be happy she made her choice and that you can do the same in that regard.

Except that I would argue that the group think you are bemoaning got us to this point in the first place. The cries of protect us have forced the rules that I do not agree with upon us all. And to make it worse, its a false sense of security. Do any of you really believe this will make us safer? I bet most of us on here could come up with two or three ideas that could take down a plane while bypassing these security measures. If someone is crazy enough and puts their mind to it, they can do it.

Life is risk. There is a better chance that the plane you are on crashes due to mechanical failure than a terrorist attack.

 

[Old Pio]

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

I'm going to hope that some day common sense will take over. Israel looks to me like they have the right model. Hiring intelligent competent people to due a thourough job and not waste millions of hours a year.

http://www.staplenews.com/home/2010...-of-airports-high-security-little-bother.html

I don't think I had a single person look me in the eye in four flights over the last month.

No one here is suggesting a full on Israeli approach (certainly not me) but it should be possible to do some profiling. Plus we should also look into expanding "Trusted Flyer" programs to reduce the haystack a bit.

 

[Handyman]

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

Except that I would argue that the group think you are bemoaning got us to this point in the first place. The cries of protect us have forced the rules that I do not agree with upon us all. And to make it worse, its a false sense of security. Do any of you really believe this will make us safer? I bet most of us on here could come up with two or three ideas that could take down a plane while bypassing these security measures. If someone is crazy enough and puts their mind to it, they can do it.

Life is risk. There is a better chance that the plane you are on crashes due to mechanical failure than a terrorist attack.

I completely agree...I am not a fan of this stuff at all but right now it is what we have and if huskyfan has no problem being searched then it is not our job to tell her otherwise. In her mind it is worth it.

 

[Handyman]

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

Wait 'til they start screening for butt bombs. You seem to have missed the point here. She won't be "giving" up anything, she has no choice. She may not CARE, and that's certainly her business, but she's made no choice. She has no rights whatsoever when it comes to submitting to the moronic dictates of TSA.

Notwithstanding your little exegesis about "group think," there is no "thinking" of any kind going on here. She either lets them take a nude picture or feel her up, or she doesn't fly.

God life must suck out there on the slippery slope. Funny I watched the news tonight and didnt see that to be the truth at MSP International...of course there were no muslims in line with Osama tattooed on their butts either so MSP must not be in that weird little world you inhabit.

Of course, anyone with an iq over 10 would realize I meant it was her choice to wear a skirt and not raise a stink about being scanned (assuming she is/was) but hey, you can continue to assume you know me so well. Hey remember that time you equated one of my posts to me being in the KKK despite my being Jewish? Hey remember all those times you decried my liberal-ness even though I usually vote third party? You, you know me so well

Don't worry, I will get off your lawn

 

[Scott W]

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

I completely agree...I am not a fan of this stuff at all but right now it is what we have and if huskyfan has no problem being searched then it is not our job to tell her otherwise. In her mind it is worth it.

That would be alright if not for the fact it is being pushed down on the rest of us whether we like it or not. I know the next argument is if I don't like it I don't have to fly, but really is that a choice I should have to make? Is it really too much to ask for people to sit down and come up with logical ideas that make us safer without taking away rights? Sadly I know the answer to that.

 

[Old Pio]

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

God life must suck out there on the slippery slope. Funny I watched the news tonight and didnt see that to be the truth at MSP International...of course there were no muslims in line with Osama tattooed on their butts either so MSP must not be in that weird little world you inhabit.

Of course, anyone with an iq over 10 would realize I meant it was her choice to wear a skirt and not raise a stink about being scanned (assuming she is/was) but hey, you can continue to assume you know me so well. Hey remember that time you equated one of my posts to me being in the KKK despite my being Jewish? Hey remember all those times you decried my liberal-ness even though I usually vote third party? You, you know me so well

Don't worry, I will get off your lawn

You write and argue like a child.

 

[leswp1]

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

And who and when and how can they be denied that right without due process? Except when we're through the looking glass and Barney Fife rules the world.

Missing the point. Flying is a service you purchase. It is not like going to elementary school where you go, if you don't then your parents get in trouble, and you don't pay to do it. I see nowhere in the constitution that says I have a right to fly. You could argue that my rights were violated if you let Joe fly but not me but only if we are not offered the same opportunity to fly because of the usual race, religion, etc. Whether it is a part of our culture is irrelevent. You don't need to do it, you want to because it might be necessary for your business, etc. but it is not a right.

Besides OP, who responded as predictable, can anyone of the legal bent explain to me where this argument is flawed.

 

[NMU8405]

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

So what do you propose? No screening? Just profiling? Tim McVeigh would be proud of you. Please tell me, in all your wonderfulness what defines a terrorist?

Also, TSA, DHS or whoever makes their polices, didnt wake up one morning and thought it was a good idea to just pat people down, or install body scanners. Im sure there were some grumblings and movements from the intelligence side of things that it might be a good idea to protect people's right to life and search for these things. Im still searching for a right to fly in the Constitution or the Declaration.

 

[leswp1]

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

You write and argue like a child.

This is the height of irony

 

[5mn_Major]

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

http://www.newser.com/story/40147/tsa-designed-only-to-catch-stupid-terrorists.html

Sorry, but your point was that new increased security standards doesn't help security at all. These are not the only measures we should employ as the article advocates. But the article says new measures will stop 'stupid' terrists. Many terrorists are stupid based on a variety of criteria.

Do we just let them board?

 

[5mn_Major]

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

That would be alright if not for the fact it is being pushed down on the rest of us whether we like it or not. I know the next argument is if I don't like it I don't have to fly, but really is that a choice I should have to make?

Is it really too much to ask for people to sit down and come up with logical ideas that make us safer without taking away rights? Sadly I know the answer to that.

Yes...you should have to make the choice of whether you want to go through rigorous security in order to fly. Even if that infringes on what you see as your 'rights'. Because as these rights are not protected by the Constitution, they are rather rights that you are self-designating.

In other words, no...you don't have a personal right to fly. Indeed inferring that you have the 'right to fly' is the same mentality that folks use with the 'right to have healthcare' to justify universal healthcare. And I assume that nobody here is advocating govt funded air travel.

 

[sagard]

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

No one here is suggesting a full on Israeli approach (certainly not me) but it should be possible to do some profiling. Plus we should also look into expanding "Trusted Flyer" programs to reduce the haystack a bit.

What would possibly be wrong with the Israeli approach? 30-40 minutes from the time you park your car to the time your at your gate?

They profile based on behavior according to their published words. Is that not close enough for you?

We simply don't trust our people. We prefer to put security in the hands of machines and protocols so we don't have take responsibility.

The way we currently enforce people and their identification, the trusted flyer program seems like a gaping security hole.

 

[Handyman]

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

You write and argue like a child.

That is all you got? After all of your ranting and twisting of facts, all of your pius platitudes and self righteous talk you have no response when someone points out your lack of credibility? I mean earlier this thread you were attacking people who assumed they knew what you were thinking or how you felt and I do the same thing and you cant even muster a response? Wow. Talk about dishing it out but not being able to take it.

You dont have to respond to this, because honestly I wont read it. You just declare yourself the victor and maybe the world wont seem so evil to you after. have a good day.

 

[Scott W]

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

Yes...you should have to make the choice of whether you want to go through rigorous security in order to fly. Even if that infringes on what you see as your 'rights'. Because as these rights are not protected by the Constitution, they are rather rights that you are self-designating.

In other words, no...you don't have a personal right to fly. Indeed inferring that you have the 'right to fly' is the same mentality that folks use with the 'right to have healthcare' to justify universal healthcare. And I assume that nobody here is advocating govt funded air travel.

Actually you are right I don't have a personal right to fly. The airlines are private industries and could exclude me if they desire. If the airlines were doing this themselves then I would have no problem with that line of thinking. The problem is the government has stepped in to do the security. So the government does not have to follow its own rules because it is doing it for a private company?

The biggest part that bothers me though is that all these new measures do is create an illusion of security. We need to focus on methods that will actually make us safer.

 

[Old Pio]

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

What would possibly be wrong with the Israeli approach? 30-40 minutes from the time you park your car to the time your at your gate?

They profile based on behavior according to their published words. Is that not close enough for you?

We simply don't trust our people. We prefer to put security in the hands of machines and protocols so we don't have take responsibility.

The way we currently enforce people and their identification, the trusted flyer program seems like a gaping security hole.

In the abstract, no problem whatsoever. There would be a huge expense in recruiting, training and paying the profilers. And you can take it to the bank that our unionizing Barney Fifes of TSA would be on NBC and CBS every night, whining about losing their jobs. There would be huge resistance from CAIR and similar groups and THAT would be on CBS and NBC night after night. Plus the "Reverands" would also be on CBS and NBC every night, leading marches and demonstrations to show solidarity with their Muslim "brothers." You can also take it to the bank that any interaction between a Muslim passenger and TSA that could possibly be construed as "racial profiling" would ALSO be grist for the mill on the networks. And Democrats in the House and Senate would fight this every step of the way. Other than that, no problem with the transition. IMO, a full-on Israeli approach would be impossible to implement here, for the reasons I mentioned, and others.Just look at the earlier responses from liberal posters on this thread, squealing like middle school girls at a haunted house at the mere mention of ANY kind of profiling. Then multiply those responses by infinity.

As to trusted flyer, I'd imagine that we could create a federal/state/local protocol that would clearly identify citizens who could be trusted to fly, with some sort of bio-metric identification provided before boarding. Iris scan, thumb scan, something. This stuff is way above my pay grade, of course, but I'm confident we could do it.

 

[Old Pio]

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

That is all you got? After all of your ranting and twisting of facts, all of your pius platitudes and self righteous talk you have no response when someone points out your lack of credibility? I mean earlier this thread you were attacking people who assumed they knew what you were thinking or how you felt and I do the same thing and you cant even muster a response? Wow. Talk about dishing it out but not being able to take it.

You dont have to respond to this, because honestly I wont read it. You just declare yourself the victor and maybe the world wont seem so evil to you after. have a good day.

Thanks for relieving me of the requirement of responding to you. And just so you know, my next computer will feature the "Jewdetector" function, so I'll be keeping an eye on you, sonny. Mazel tov.

 

[Old Pio]

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

Missing the point. Flying is a service you purchase. It is not like going to elementary school where you go, if you don't then your parents get in trouble, and you don't pay to do it. I see nowhere in the constitution that says I have a right to fly. You could argue that my rights were violated if you let Joe fly but not me but only if we are not offered the same opportunity to fly because of the usual race, religion, etc. Whether it is a part of our culture is irrelevent. You don't need to do it, you want to because it might be necessary for your business, etc. but it is not a right.

Besides OP, who responded as predictable, can anyone of the legal bent explain to me where this argument is flawed.

You're right, in a legal sense. I'm not making a consitutional argument here. I'm merely suggesting that generally speaking, Americans can fly if they want to and don't need Big Brother's permission to do it. Just as they can buy a Tootsie Roll if they want, again without Big Brother's permission. It's between the airlines and their passengers, but the government here has intruded into this relationship in the name of "security." Certainly we need "security," but it's not at all certain that the way the government is going about it is the best way.
Periodic tightening of the screws on every single member of the flying public, in response to the latest terrorist effort, strikes me as grossly inefficient, at a minimum.

I have asked, and so far no one has answered: Can you conceive of any "security" enhancement that would cross the line? And are you confident TSA would never implement such an enhancement? I can. And I'm not.

 

[Old Pio]

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

This is the height of irony

Oh I don't know, I've seen some pretty high irony around here. Can we review the play?

 

[unofan]

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

Missing the point. Flying is a service you purchase. It is not like going to elementary school where you go, if you don't then your parents get in trouble, and you don't pay to do it. I see nowhere in the constitution that says I have a right to fly. You could argue that my rights were violated if you let Joe fly but not me but only if we are not offered the same opportunity to fly because of the usual race, religion, etc. Whether it is a part of our culture is irrelevent. You don't need to do it, you want to because it might be necessary for your business, etc. but it is not a right.

Besides OP, who responded as predictable, can anyone of the legal bent explain to me where this argument is flawed.

You have the right to partake in interstate travel and you have the right to be secure in your person from unreasonable searches and seizures.
As to the first:

This Court long ago recognized that the nature of our Federal Union and our constitutional concepts of personal liberty unite to require that all citizens be free to travel throughout the length and breadth of our land uninhibited by statutes, rules, or regulations which unreasonably burden or restrict this movement. That [p630] proposition was early stated by Chief Justice Taney in the Passenger Cases, 7 How. 283, 492 (1849):

For all the great purposes for which the Federal government was formed, we are one people, with one common country. We are all citizens of the United States; and, as members of the same community, must have the right to pass and repass through every part of it without interruption, as freely as in our own States.

We have no occasion to ascribe the source of this right to travel interstate to a particular constitutional provision. [n8] It suffices that, as MR. JUSTICE STEWART said for the Court in United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 757-758 (166):

The constitutional right to travel from one State to another . . . occupies a position fundamental to the concept of our Federal Union. It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized.

. . . [T]he right finds no explicit mention in the Constitution. The reason, it has been suggested, is [p631] that a right so elementary was conceived from the beginning to be a necessary concomitant of the stronger Union the Constitution created. In any event, freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the Constitution. United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570, 581 (1968).

Now you can argue that the right to travel only covers movement by foot and not car, train, plane, or ship, but I really doubt that would hold up.

The key under both the right to travel and the 4th amendment is reasonableness. Equal protection and due process don't come into play at all. I don't think they're reasonable. You might think otherwise, but there's a big jump from metal detectors to gropings.