Texas legislation proposes ban for body scanner & felony charges for TSA agents

[jkderby]

No scanners. No Federal $$$ go to the airports.

[Wes]

"They who can give up essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

I think 'ol Ben had it right. How much of our freedom and liberty are we willing to let the government strip from us for the illusion of safety? Don't ask me for the solution because I don't think I know. I deeply believe, however, that there has GOT to be a better way. Profiling? Maybe - but not necessarily racial. Evidently the Israeli's are masters at profiling actions and behavior. Maybe we can learn a thing or two from them.


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." - The US Constitution, 4th Amendment

The 4th Amendment is the basis for my disagreement with the actions of the goverment where the TSA is involved. I have the RIGHT to be free in my person from any unreasonable search. I believe that the grope-fest that the TSA engages in with those that refuse the full-body scanner qualifies as an unreasonable search.

YMMV.

[mitchozie]

Sacrificing LIBERTY
For SECURITY
Is STUPIDITY

[brad]

Do not forget that no one is forcing you to fly in a plane. These are the rules required for you to do something that is your choice to do. Talk of freedom and liberty don't apply. You are still free - free to choose a different form of travel.

[Wes]

Brad - no offense, but I really have to disagree. In THEORY, what you said is absolutely true. However, in the real world, things aren't that simple. In today's world many people travel by air out of necessity. In a lot of instances a lot of corporations could not do business without the expediency of air travel.

[brad]

No offense taken, we can agree to disagree on it. There are always alternatives, including doing business in a different way. No one puts a gun to their head or even passes a law that says they must use air travel to conduct business.

Yes, you have the expediency of air travel, but in order to use it, you must follow their rules and make sacrifices. Its a privilege to fly, not a right.. and in order to take advantage of it, there may be things you give up. If the sacrifice is too great, find another method of travel and/or doing business.

I, personally, do not care that much about the TSA requirements since I have structured my life around other travel methods... in part for this very reason. I do not like flying anyway, one might even call it a full fledged phobia. With these kinds of requirements on air travel, its become more of a hassle to fly than to travel by other methods. Combine those things together and I have no desire left to travel that way. I do not travel for vacation farther than I can drive and I do not take business jobs that require me to fly.

[Flea77]

Originally Posted by brad

Do not forget that no one is forcing you to fly in a plane. These are the rules required for you to do something that is your choice to do. Talk of freedom and liberty don't apply. You are still free - free to choose a different form of travel.

I too have to disagree with you Brad.

It is also your choice to breathe, to walk outside your front door, to have a job, to eat, etc. You could choose to not breathe and just fall over dead (Yes, I know that is pretty ridiculous, but it does illustrate the point well).

So what if the searches were on trains too? Buses? Before you got into your car? Before you left your house on foot? Every time you entered a publicly accessable building (Think WalMart, Subway, Post Office)? Where do YOU draw the line?

My wife and I used to fly all the time, nine trips to Vegas in about five years. We have not flown since 9/11. Not because of a fear of terrorists, but because of the TSA. The only two ways I would ever get on a plane again would be if the TSA BS goes away, or if someone gave me a free two week trip to Europe all expenses paid. Las Vegas (among other places), the airlines, and the government has lost a TON of my vacation money.

Allan

[brad]

Originally Posted by Flea77

It is also your choice to breathe, to walk outside your front door, to have a job, to eat, etc. You could choose to not breathe and just fall over dead (Yes, I know that is pretty ridiculous, but it does illustrate the point well).

So what if the searches were on trains too? Buses? Before you got into your car? Before you left your house on foot? Every time you entered a publicly accessable building (Think WalMart, Subway, Post Office)? Where do YOU draw the line?

Its quite simple where I draw the line... they aren't restricting travel, only adding rules for a specific method of travel. And the *intent* is for public safety. Rights are suspended and outright violated all the time and throughout history when the public's best interest is at stake. Did you know Lincoln issued an executive order suspending the citizen's right to Habeus Corpus during the Civil War?

They already restrict your job -- you cannot work in a sensitive area without passing federal background checks. You cannot work in any job without filling out the proper I-9 paperwork. Is that paperwork an invasion of your privacy, too? Police restrict travel by automobile all the time when they set up sobriety checkpoints. In short, where do YOU draw the line? If you don't like it, what are YOU doing about it? Writing your Congress people or complaining on a forum?

Like I told Wes, we can agree to disagree on this point... we're all going to have different lines in the sand. Most of us (you and I and Wes) can agree to disagree civilly. Others do not have that ability... its one of the reasons why Politics are banned around here.. and this is a very political subject.

There is no right and wrong answer to this. My point is that not everyone feels as outraged by this as the writers of that blog and the OP.

Oh, and my original point wasn't so much to debate the TSA as it was to point out that the state doesn't have the right to override the TSA... at least not based on the 10th Amendment. It doesn't apply here.

[mitchozie]

Originally Posted by brad

Do not forget that no one is forcing you to fly in a plane. These are the rules required for you to do something that is your choice to do. Talk of freedom and liberty don't apply. You are still free - free to choose a different form of travel.

No one is forcing you to walk the streets, or drive your car. So, if they (the government) decide to xray you or your vehicle, or pat you down on the streets, if those are the rules, then freedom doesn't apply ????

I'm sorry, but that is BS !!!

[brad]

Originally Posted by mitchozie

No one is forcing you to walk the streets, or drive your car. So, if they (the government) decide to xray you or your vehicle, or pat you down on the streets, if those are the rules, then freedom doesn't apply ????

I'm sorry, but that is BS !!!

There are situations and realities in which they will do just that. But that's not my point. The point is to get you to look at it from the other side. It is not a search for no reason. It is a condition of travel by this particular means and situation.

But if you want to continue throwing up ridiculous examples to cloud this specific issue, I can do it, too.

Your argument, taken to the extreme the other direction says that any level of screening to get on a plane is a violation of your right against unwarranted search (your 4th Amendment rights). Metal detectors at the courthouse should be banned. Gates at military bases should be open to the public for people to pass through at will. Anyone should be able to take on any kind of employment without proof of being registered to pay proper taxes on that employment.

Like I quoted Flea above... Where do YOU draw the line? Everyone's lines are in different places. What constitutes unwarranted? At what point does a warranted search become unwarranted? At one point does it cross the line from a reasonable search to an unreasonable one?

I said it above and I will say it again, there is no right and wrong answer to this.

[mitchozie]

You're right, we are approaching this from two very different viewpoints. You assume that the TSA is there to protect you, I assume the TSA is there to subordinate, and control you. BTW, I have no interest in looking at things from their viewpoint.

[Kalrog]

Originally Posted by brad

Its quite simple where I draw the line... they aren't restricting travel, only adding rules for a specific method of travel.

If the method of restriction is different for each type of travel, is it okay then?

Cars - there are many places where suspiciousness searches take place. They happen in the name of finding drunk drivers or people without insurance is some cities. They happen on some interstates 100s of miles away from the border in the name of immigration. Are these okay?

Trains - TSA like searches are happening at some stations.

Planes - See above.

So as long as I can take a horse or walk or ride a bike does that mean my rights to freedom of movement are in tact? I don't think so - not today.

I think I draw the line when I am searched (for whatever reason) without probable cause. I see dozens of civilians daily with firearms and that doesn't scare me. It wouldn't scare me any more if they were on the planes with them too.

[jkderby]

Get over it folks !!! If you don't like it don't fly.

[mitchozie]

Originally Posted by jkderby

Get over it folks !!! If you don't like it don't fly.

If by, "Get over it", you mean accept an increasingly tyrannical police state, that will drastically alter the country your children and grandchildren will inhabit, I don't think that's a good idea.

[Abel]

enough of the politics talk...

Per our rules... we do not allow it.