Police State or something else?

[letmetellyou]

the TSA has been USELESS thwarting any further ... the Shoe Bomber, The Underwear bomber ...... both thwarted by the passengers

TSA has been repeatedly shown to be incompetent, thugs that hassle grand ma and little children instead of adopting Highly Successful Israeli profiling models and methods, because some mooselimb, might get asked a few additional questions or refused a flight



care to discuss the 'NO Fly List'

You don't know what hasn't happened because of the precautions they are taking. Don't like it....don't fly.

 

[ShannonM]

You've said they came one step from performing a cavity search and called it reasonable, there was no logicin this. you're a sheep

You hide behind calling people names and your version of "justice" and "rights". Is everything in your life about only you and what you want? Do you ever consider that sometimes it's in the best interest of the greater good if you be a little flexible? I'm a reasonable person who is capable of having a conversation with differing opinions without irrational behavior and name calling. Your idea of "rights" is to have the loudest opinion and you call me a sheep that deserves no rights. Perhaps you should consider what you'd be called if I weren't a nice individual and someone with a typing finger as big as yours were in my shoes. Would you like name calling and bickering without merrit? I'm sure that helps so much to get your point across...

 

[letmetellyou]

Ahh - I see you left out courthouses on this post. Still waiting on your answer to my question.

I think it's reasonable to search people entering a court house. Do you not?

 

[TPD]

I think it's reasonable to search people entering a court house. Do you not?

The courtroom - maybe. But if I just want to go in and do a records search, I should not have to consent to a search. If I need to pick up my notary certificate, I should not have to consent to a search. What really gets me is when attorneys do not receive the same scrutiny as I do in a courthouse screening.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

basically Airports are Private Business .... and

The TSA was created as a response to the September 11, 2001, attacks. Its first administrator, John Magaw, was nominated by President Bush on December 10, 2001, and confirmed by the Senate the following January. The agency's proponents, including Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, argued that only a single federal agency would better protect air travel than the private companies who operated under contract to single airlines or groups of airlines that used a given terminal facility.

The organization was charged with developing policies to protect U.S. transportation, especially in airport security and the prevention of aircraft hijacking.

With state, local, and regional partners, the TSA oversees security for highways, railroads, buses, mass transit systems, pipelines, ports. However, the bulk of the TSA's efforts are in aviation security. The TSA is solely responsible for screening passengers and checked and carry-on baggage at 450 U.S. airports.[5][not in citation given]

It also works with local police and other law enforcement official to reduce baggage theft in many airports.[citation needed] In Las Vegas in summer 2007, a sting operation caught two airport employees stealing weapons.[6] However, the TSA does not, as a matter of policy, share baggage theft reports with local police departments.[7]

Private screening did not disappear under the TSA, which allows airports to opt out of federal screening and hire firms to do the job instead. Such firms must still get TSA approval under its Screening Partnership Program (SPP) and follow TSA procedures.[8] Among the U.S. airports with privately operated checkpoints are San Francisco International Airport; Kansas City International Airport; Greater Rochester International Airport; Tupelo Regional Airport; Key West International Airport; Charles M. Schulz – Sonoma County Airport; and Jackson Hole Airport.[9][10]

 

[ShannonM]

so you would be fine with a random cavity search ?

ya know, just to be safe ......

If I choose to fly and there's case for alarm then it'll be what it'll be won't it? It's a choice. You don't have to fly if you don't like the imposed searches. If you want regulations changed then you have to present a better alternative that includes necessary safety. In the mean time it is what it is if you choose to fly today. There's no real right or wrong in it nor is it about our personal rights. It's what is currently necessary in the eyes of our government to protect our nation. Given the right not to be searched simply isn't as important to me personally.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

it is about 'Security Theater' nothing more



and sheep are willing to give up rights, and privileges to feel safe, when there is no guaranteed safety

 

[Merlin99]

Exactly. Plain English. It protects from unreasonable searches and siezures. You think it's unreasonable for people to be searched entering the Capitol and White House and the courthouse. (there you go) Okay. You are the problem because you can't understand what is reasonable or not.

What makes it reasonable, where is the probable cause?

 

[EmptyTimCup]

sheep just want a false sense of security and are willing to give up any rights to get that .........

 

[TPD]

I just talked to my European friend. He told me that because of the United States, Europeans are now subject to some of the same airport screening procedures that we are, including that useless liquid ban. And we wonder why other nations hates us, which is part of the reason we need some of this unnecessary screening...what came first - the egg or the chicken?

 

[ShannonM]

it is about 'Security Theater' nothing more



and sheep are willing to give up rights, and privileges to feel safe, when there is no guaranteed safety

And we are back to sheep again what are y'all related or something?

Of course there is no guaranteed safety. You could have any freak accident claim your life today here and now but knowing that and knowing that you could do one small thing to help prevent possible threats...hello. It just seems like a no brainer to me. The whole topic just seems like another extremist debate so I'm stepping off it.

Want it changed find a better solution until then get over it.

 

[jackers]

Wow, and you guys call yourselves Conservatives. What are you conserving? Obviously not your rights.

Geez people, when did you start depending on the federal government to keep us all safe and warm and secure? You are a lost cause.

 

[JoeRider]

There is a simple solution just nuke half the Middle East. Bottom line quite complaining. There are more important things to worry about.

 

[Merlin99]

You hide behind calling people names and your version of "justice" and "rights". Is everything in your life about only you and what you want? Do you ever consider that sometimes it's in the best interest of the greater good if you be a little flexible? I'm a reasonable person who is capable of having a conversation with differing opinions without irrational behavior and name calling. Your idea of "rights" is to have the loudest opinion and you call me a sheep that deserves no rights. Perhaps you should consider what you'd be called if I weren't a nice individual and someone with a typing finger as big as yours were in my shoes. Would you like name calling and bickering without merrit? I'm sure that helps so much to get your point across...

No I believe in the constitution, you on the other hand think it should be tossed to make you safer. I really don't think think there's any room to be flexible on this, I think that is the slippery slope that leads to the complete dismissal of the constitution. I am not trying to have the loudest opinion, but in case you didn't notice I'm having multiple ones here. Call me names if it makes you feel better, I assure you it's not going to bother me and it may give you a moment of pleasure. I think I've answered all of your points, in closing a paraphrased quote from B. Franklin

They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 

[TPD]

Ok, so if the TSA is the only one that knows how to protect us, why are they rechecking bags AFTER we have gone through their security checks? Why are they now taking out body scanners after spending millions and saying this new scanner was going to be our savior? Why do they not profile, which has proven to be successful in other countries? Why can children keep shoes on but adults cannot when going through screening? With so many whys, how can you still feel any safer than pre-9/11?

 

[Merlin99]

And we are back to sheep again what are y'all related or something?

Of course there is no guaranteed safety. You could have any freak accident claim your life today here and now but knowing that and knowing that you could do one small thing to help prevent possible threats...hello. It just seems like a no brainer to me. The whole topic just seems like another extremist debate so I'm stepping off it.

Want it changed find a better solution until then get over it.

Sheep is a term for someone who follows the herd mentality without question.

 

[letmetellyou]

The courtroom - maybe. But if I just want to go in and do a records search, I should not have to consent to a search. If I need to pick up my notary certificate, I should not have to consent to a search. What really gets me is when attorneys do not receive the same scrutiny as I do in a courthouse screening.

Oh, I get it. What you want is for government to spend money on four xray machines, and eight extra officers to man them. Ya...that makes perfect sense. You are a completely reasonable person.

 

[letmetellyou]

No I believe in the constitution, you on the other hand think it should be tossed to make you safer. I really don't think think there's any room to be flexible on this, I think that is the slippery slope that leads to the complete dismissal of the constitution. I am not trying to have the loudest opinion, but in case you didn't notice I'm having multiple ones here. Call me names if it makes you feel better, I assure you it's not going to bother me and it may give you a moment of pleasure. I think I've answered all of your points, in closing a paraphrased quote from B. Franklin

Where is anyone violating anyone's constitutional rights? Nobody is forced to go through any of these searches! You choose to. How is this a violation of your rights?

 

[TPD]

Oh, I get it. What you want is for government to spend money on four xray machines, and eight extra officers to man them. Ya...that makes perfect sense. You are a completely reasonable person.

One officer with a wand when court is in session is reasonable and all that is necessary. A wand will detect a gun - the only real threat in a courtroom, other than angry unreasonable people who have been wronged or think they have been wronged by the justice system. The bailiff can handle any other threats.

 

[TPD]

Where is anyone violating anyone's constitutional rights? Nobody is forced to go through any of these searches! You choose to. How is this a violation of your rights?

What? Since I am NOT part of the 47%, I am forced to go through a search each time I have to go to the courthouse for non-court related business, specifically for my business THAT I BUILT - i.e. business license, bad check enforcement, real-estate records search, etc.