Another egregious breach of the Constitution

135

Comments

  • mikepegg44
    mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    inmytree wrote:
    I'm trying to figure out what Constitutional right was breached...

    I'm serious...

    I'm thinking he had to hit the restroom to dump is weed prior to the patdown...


    The discussion is about the 4th amendment mostly. They are considering the search a violation. The TSA is a government agency and should have to adhere to the rules of reasonable searches...the question is are the enhanced pat downs and full body scanners a reasonable search. I don't know if it is or not...Personally I think you should have to give consent for a possible search when you buy your ticket...if you don't at least you were made aware of the procedures before you have spent money on a non-refundable ticket...
    I would love to know how many attacks have been prevented since we implemented our sweet new machines and pat downs..."placebo"...glad it makes people feel better, but they will still get stuff on planes...why we waste time trying to stop the techniques used in the past, they develop new ones...
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    inmytree wrote:
    I'm trying to figure out what Constitutional right was breached...

    I'm serious...

    I'm thinking he had to hit the restroom to dump is weed prior to the patdown...


    The discussion is about the 4th amendment mostly. They are considering the search a violation. The TSA is a government agency and should have to adhere to the rules of reasonable searches...the question is are the enhanced pat downs and full body scanners a reasonable search. I don't know if it is or not...Personally I think you should have to give consent for a possible search when you buy your ticket...if you don't at least you were made aware of the procedures before you have spent money on a non-refundable ticket...
    I would love to know how many attacks have been prevented since we implemented our sweet new machines and pat downs..."placebo"...glad it makes people feel better, but they will still get stuff on planes...why we waste time trying to stop the techniques used in the past, they develop new ones...


    That's what I thought, the 4th amendment thing that is...

    And yes, I agree the notion of "reasonable search" is debatable...

    I do find it interesting that folks are ok with a patdown prior to entering a sporting event or a concert but lose their shit when the TSA asks them to submit to something similar...I know they are not exactly the same, but similar enough to make me wonder...
  • Sludge Factory
    Sludge Factory Posts: 976
    puremagic wrote:
    LikeAnOcean wrote:
    I am no Rand Paul supporter, but people, put yourself in his shoes..

    You are an elected official in an airport on your way to your job of making the freaking laws of the land.


    The machine goes off when you walk through it, and naturally you know there is a mistake and request to try it again, which he did, but was refused a second try and put through a pat down.


    Is that not embarassing enough? To be denied a simple request to try to walk through it again when you are an elected official on your way to Washington?


    I would be embarrassed as hell and given his political beliefs, how could he not argue with the situation.


    I could appreciate all that you said, except for the fact that Rand Paul is a seasoned traveler; he knows what to expect every time he enters an airport facility. He knows the procedures and rather than get into a back and forth about Rand Paul, I chose to focus on the laws enacted that could allow this to occur.

    However, the more I hear him and his Dad go on and on about this, I’m beginning to think this was a nothing more than a political move; just another talking point ploy about reducing the government, yet nothing about the fact that he’d still have to secure the airports. Is he willing to bring up the fact that if they elect not to use the TSA, they’d have to contract the same work out to private securities firms, at a higher pay rate, because the law requires them to secure air travel. Wonder how many of these so called private technology firms are part of their portfolios from these insider moves.

    Just because the “law” says something doesn’t mean people need to roll over and let their rights and civil liberties be trampled on. No attention would be brought to the injustice of it all if that were the case. It is because Rand Paul is such a seasoned traveler that this was a perfect opportunity to direct more light onto a system that is ineffective.

    It shouldn’t matter if Rand Paul (or anyone for that matter) knows what to expect every time he enters an airport. This doesn’t mean people should just shut up and move along. What good does it do to just acquiesce and give in? That is what they want and that is how this country has moved so far away from the protection of everyone’s civil liberties to the oppression of civil liberties.

    I just don’t get this mentality of “he should’ve known better and just moved along. It’s the “law””. Does no one here really care about questioning the legitimacy of these laws that infringe on our personal liberties and civil rights anymore?

    Your scenario where if it wasn’t the TSA it would just be a private security firm at higher pay is very one dimensional. You are assuming that this terrible law needs to stay in effect. The law itself mandating how security should be handled needs to be repealed itself. It is nothing but a sham and only serves to create a false sense of security. If the airports and airlines themselves were in charge of implementing security instead of relying on the government telling them what to do, I believe a more effective approach to airline security would be realized.

    Just look at the incidents that have made it through the TSA’s crack team of inspectors. What stopped these incidents? It certainly wasn’t the TSA. It ended up being either the flight crew or the passengers themselves who stopped them.
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    Sludge Factory wrote:
    puremagic wrote:
    LikeAnOcean wrote:
    I am no Rand Paul supporter, but people, put yourself in his shoes..

    You are an elected official in an airport on your way to your job of making the freaking laws of the land.


    The machine goes off when you walk through it, and naturally you know there is a mistake and request to try it again, which he did, but was refused a second try and put through a pat down.


    Is that not embarassing enough? To be denied a simple request to try to walk through it again when you are an elected official on your way to Washington?


    I would be embarrassed as hell and given his political beliefs, how could he not argue with the situation.


    I could appreciate all that you said, except for the fact that Rand Paul is a seasoned traveler; he knows what to expect every time he enters an airport facility. He knows the procedures and rather than get into a back and forth about Rand Paul, I chose to focus on the laws enacted that could allow this to occur.

    However, the more I hear him and his Dad go on and on about this, I’m beginning to think this was a nothing more than a political move; just another talking point ploy about reducing the government, yet nothing about the fact that he’d still have to secure the airports. Is he willing to bring up the fact that if they elect not to use the TSA, they’d have to contract the same work out to private securities firms, at a higher pay rate, because the law requires them to secure air travel. Wonder how many of these so called private technology firms are part of their portfolios from these insider moves.

    Just because the “law” says something doesn’t mean people need to roll over and let their rights and civil liberties be trampled on. No attention would be brought to the injustice of it all if that were the case. It is because Rand Paul is such a seasoned traveler that this was a perfect opportunity to direct more light onto a system that is ineffective.

    It shouldn’t matter if Rand Paul (or anyone for that matter) knows what to expect every time he enters an airport. This doesn’t mean people should just shut up and move along. What good does it do to just acquiesce and give in? That is what they want and that is how this country has moved so far away from the protection of everyone’s civil liberties to the oppression of civil liberties.

    I just don’t get this mentality of “he should’ve known better and just moved along. It’s the “law””. Does no one here really care about questioning the legitimacy of these laws that infringe on our personal liberties and civil rights anymore?

    Your scenario where if it wasn’t the TSA it would just be a private security firm at higher pay is very one dimensional. You are assuming that this terrible law needs to stay in effect. The law itself mandating how security should be handled needs to be repealed itself. It is nothing but a sham and only serves to create a false sense of security. If the airports and airlines themselves were in charge of implementing security instead of relying on the government telling them what to do, I believe a more effective approach to airline security would be realized.

    Just look at the incidents that have made it through the TSA’s crack team of inspectors. What stopped these incidents? It certainly wasn’t the TSA. It ended up being either the flight crew or the passengers themselves who stopped them.

    Sludge is on the money.
  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,621
    puremagic wrote:


    However, the more I hear him and his Dad go on and on about this, I’m beginning to think this was a nothing more than a political move; just another talking point ploy about reducing the government, yet nothing about the fact that he’d still have to secure the airports. Is he willing to bring up the fact that if they elect not to use the TSA, they’d have to contract the same work out to private securities firms, at a higher pay rate, because the law requires them to secure air travel. Wonder how many of these so called private technology firms are part of their portfolios from these insider moves.

    I have little doubt it was all vary calculated. Now tea-person Rand can play victim, get air time, and have his dad's name thrown in the mix mid primary campaign. This will irk many young, white males, and they'll post things on the internet like 'we're a half generation from losing our freedoms'. Maybe it'll sell some books, too.
  • mikepegg44
    mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    Go Beavers wrote:
    puremagic wrote:


    However, the more I hear him and his Dad go on and on about this, I’m beginning to think this was a nothing more than a political move; just another talking point ploy about reducing the government, yet nothing about the fact that he’d still have to secure the airports. Is he willing to bring up the fact that if they elect not to use the TSA, they’d have to contract the same work out to private securities firms, at a higher pay rate, because the law requires them to secure air travel. Wonder how many of these so called private technology firms are part of their portfolios from these insider moves.

    I have little doubt it was all vary calculated. Now tea-person Rand can play victim, get air time, and have his dad's name thrown in the mix mid primary campaign. This will irk many young, white males, and they'll post things on the internet like 'we're a half generation from losing our freedoms'. Maybe it'll sell some books, too.


    so rand purposely missed a speaking engagement, purposely set off the scanner, and OFFERED TO WALK BACK THROUGH in lieu of a pat down and was denied that opportunity all to sell some books and get Daddy's name mentioned? They couldn't even tell him what the machine detected.
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,621
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    Go Beavers wrote:
    puremagic wrote:


    However, the more I hear him and his Dad go on and on about this, I’m beginning to think this was a nothing more than a political move; just another talking point ploy about reducing the government, yet nothing about the fact that he’d still have to secure the airports. Is he willing to bring up the fact that if they elect not to use the TSA, they’d have to contract the same work out to private securities firms, at a higher pay rate, because the law requires them to secure air travel. Wonder how many of these so called private technology firms are part of their portfolios from these insider moves.

    I have little doubt it was all vary calculated. Now tea-person Rand can play victim, get air time, and have his dad's name thrown in the mix mid primary campaign. This will irk many young, white males, and they'll post things on the internet like 'we're a half generation from losing our freedoms'. Maybe it'll sell some books, too.


    so rand purposely missed a speaking engagement, purposely set off the scanner, and OFFERED TO WALK BACK THROUGH in lieu of a pat down and was denied that opportunity all to sell some books and get Daddy's name mentioned? They couldn't even tell him what the machine detected.

    Correct. He knew he didn't have the option to offer another walk through after refusing a pat down. Some people disagreed with me when I said Ron preaches fear. Here's dad's quote about the incident:

    "The police state in this country is growing out of control. One of the ultimate embodiments of this is the TSA that gropes and grabs our children, our seniors, and our loved ones and neighbors with disabilities," Ron Paul said in a statement issued by his presidential campaign. "The TSA does all of this while doing nothing to keep us safe."

    Keep eating it up, you guys.
  • SweetChildofMine
    SweetChildofMine Posts: 842
    We just all need to fly naked. - Jello Biafra
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    When did liberals stop caring about civil liberties?
  • SweetChildofMine
    SweetChildofMine Posts: 842
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    When did liberals stop caring about civil liberties?
    When the Pauls decided to co-opt the liberal movement for their own profit.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    When did liberals stop caring about civil liberties?

    more like when did non-liberals start caring about civil liberties ... :lol:
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    SweetChildofMine wrote:
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    When did liberals stop caring about civil liberties?
    When the Pauls decided to co-opt the liberal movement for their own profit.

    35 years ago? 10-4.
  • mikepegg44
    mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    Go Beavers wrote:
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    Go Beavers wrote:

    I have little doubt it was all vary calculated. Now tea-person Rand can play victim, get air time, and have his dad's name thrown in the mix mid primary campaign. This will irk many young, white males, and they'll post things on the internet like 'we're a half generation from losing our freedoms'. Maybe it'll sell some books, too.


    so rand purposely missed a speaking engagement, purposely set off the scanner, and OFFERED TO WALK BACK THROUGH in lieu of a pat down and was denied that opportunity all to sell some books and get Daddy's name mentioned? They couldn't even tell him what the machine detected.

    Correct. He knew he didn't have the option to offer another walk through after refusing a pat down. Some people disagreed with me when I said Ron preaches fear. Here's dad's quote about the incident:

    "The police state in this country is growing out of control. One of the ultimate embodiments of this is the TSA that gropes and grabs our children, our seniors, and our loved ones and neighbors with disabilities," Ron Paul said in a statement issued by his presidential campaign. "The TSA does all of this while doing nothing to keep us safe."

    Keep eating it up, you guys.

    Explain his position on Iran. Explain his position on all foreign policy, explain his positions on the war on drugs...what kind of fear are you talking about? the very real fear that the federal government is stepping on liberty (1st patriot act, 2nd ndaa, wonder what the third installment of rights grabs will complete the trilogy?) in the name of security...for god's sake...they can now detain American citizens suspected of terrorism indefinitely...you realize this includes domestic terrorists right? you know, just about every activist on the FBI radar...its too bad he has the track record of the fears he talks about coming true...

    A lot of law makers preach fear to further their agenda, based on his history and integrity while in office, I don't believe Ron Paul uses fears for personal gain...I guess we will have to agree to disagree
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • mikepegg44
    mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    SweetChildofMine wrote:
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    When did liberals stop caring about civil liberties?
    When the Pauls decided to co-opt the liberal movement for their own profit.

    35 years ago? 10-4.


    elaborate plot vinny, have to admire their dedication...it just took a while to gain momentum all leading to this... expertly getting his son elected to the senate, having him wait a little while and then denying a pat down on after purposely setting off the scanner at an airport, what a wonderful money making idea, I bet they sell tens of books because of this awesome stunt...also, being the type of politician that literally is ignored at all costs by the media...another great money maker...I can't believe I didn't see it before.
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    mikepegg44 wrote:


    elaborate plot vinny, have to admire their dedication...it just took a while to gain momentum all leading to this... expertly getting his son elected to the senate, having him wait a little while and then denying a pat down on after purposely setting off the scanner at an airport, what a wonderful money making idea, I bet they sell tens of books because of this awesome stunt...also, being the type of politician that literally is ignored at all costs by the media...another great money maker...I can't believe I didn't see it before.

    ...and WE'RE the conspiracy theorists ;)
  • SweetChildofMine
    SweetChildofMine Posts: 842
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    mikepegg44 wrote:


    elaborate plot vinny, have to admire their dedication...it just took a while to gain momentum all leading to this... expertly getting his son elected to the senate, having him wait a little while and then denying a pat down on after purposely setting off the scanner at an airport, what a wonderful money making idea, I bet they sell tens of books because of this awesome stunt...also, being the type of politician that literally is ignored at all costs by the media...another great money maker...I can't believe I didn't see it before.

    ...and WE'RE the conspiracy theorists ;)
    :lol: Sad but true.


    I think Im now going to eat some "Jeffery Jello" in the AET. Maybe find some sanity in this world.
  • mikepegg44
    mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    mikepegg44 wrote:


    elaborate plot vinny, have to admire their dedication...it just took a while to gain momentum all leading to this... expertly getting his son elected to the senate, having him wait a little while and then denying a pat down on after purposely setting off the scanner at an airport, what a wonderful money making idea, I bet they sell tens of books because of this awesome stunt...also, being the type of politician that literally is ignored at all costs by the media...another great money maker...I can't believe I didn't see it before.

    ...and WE'RE the conspiracy theorists ;)


    :lol:

    I can't remember who said this but he must have been a genius... "its too bad he has the track record of the fears he talks about coming true"
    oh wait...it was me :D
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • SweetChildofMine
    SweetChildofMine Posts: 842
    polaris_x wrote:
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    When did liberals stop caring about civil liberties?

    more like when did non-liberals start caring about civil liberties ... :lol:
    That too! :lol:
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    polaris_x wrote:
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    When did liberals stop caring about civil liberties?

    more like when did non-liberals start caring about civil liberties ... :lol:

    Libertarians are OG liberals. "Liberal" has come to mean something a lot different now than that same word that was used to describe someone like Thomas Jefferson.

    A true conservative, as in conservative of the constitution would value civil liberties as well.

    It is perturbing to me that a lot of people that would have rightly opposed the Patriot Act under Bush have done a 180 on the subject since it has been supported by the current president and has been railed against by some members of the Tea Party movement.
  • Sludge Factory
    Sludge Factory Posts: 976
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    When did liberals stop caring about civil liberties?

    more like when did non-liberals start caring about civil liberties ... :lol:

    Libertarians are OG liberals. "Liberal" has come to mean something a lot different now than that same word that was used to describe someone like Thomas Jefferson.

    A true conservative, as in conservative of the constitution would value civil liberties as well.

    It is perturbing to me that a lot of people that would have rightly opposed the Patriot Act under Bush have done a 180 on the subject since it has been supported by the current president and has been railed against by some members of the Tea Party movement.

    Yeah, this hypocrisy is what I don't get. If you are for civil liberties why should it matter which side is trying to protect those civil liberties and which side is trying to infringe on those civil liberties. It would seem to me that those who believe in our civil liberties would support others who believe and try to protect them regardless of their party affiliation.

Categories