• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

94-year-old upset by TSA pat down

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,050
Reaction score
33,368
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Link

RALEIGH (WTVD) -- A 94-year-old wheelchair-bound Florida woman says a search she went through at Raleigh/Durham International Airport went too far.

Marian Peterson said it happened July 6 as she went through a TSA security checkpoint before boarding a flight home.
Peterson said she was selected for extra screening. First, security officers lifted her out of her wheelchair and helped her stand in a full body scanner. Then, she was given a physical pat down.
"They took me to one side and they patted me down, and they made me stand for, with my arms out, for over 10 minutes," she said. "I was beginning to feel that I wasn't going to be able to continue to stand, I was going to fall down or something."
"I asked, I said why are you doing this, and the woman was very polite and said 'I don't know, maybe the scanner detected something or maybe she moved,'" recalled Peterson's daughter Marian Malone.
Peterson's family said it's not just the length of the search they object to, it's the way it was done.
How about common sense as a security measure.
 
Hopefully they sue. The government has no business violating your 4th amendment rights.
 
So far no one with authority is saying it's a violation, so the groping of grandma continues unabated. It's a lemmings scenario, where everyone at the bottom knows in their hearts that this is wrong, but can't seem to overcome the inertia to stop it. The really bad thing is that the TSA and federal govt are not required to prove its effectiveness. So you don't know whether the lack of attacks is due to searches or just dumb luck.
 
So far no one with authority is saying it's a violation, so the groping of grandma continues unabated. It's a lemmings scenario, where everyone at the bottom knows in their hearts that this is wrong, but can't seem to overcome the inertia to stop it. The really bad thing is that the TSA and federal govt are not required to prove its effectiveness. So you don't know whether the lack of attacks is due to searches or just dumb luck.

The lack of attacks is most likely (given historical records) due to the fact that terrorist attacks on our soil proper (just the 50 States) is a very low probability event to start with. Given enough time, we will see another; with time all probabilities work out. But it's not like we were suffering from a few terrorist attacks a year. There were proper security measures to take with the airport, however, given the probabilities at stake it seems that the very invasive forms of search as utilized currently by the government are unreasonable as the amount of additional protection cannot be said to net us anything worth the cost of TSA and their equipment (those full body scanners are expensive, and we're broke) not to mention the authorization of at best questionable uses of government force.

The TSA should go away.
 
The problem with common sense: The TSA, and their apologizers wouldn't stand for it.

Look at ANY CNN discussion on the issue [on their website] - the arguments those blindly supporting he TSA make go beyond stupid... a couple of the commenting readers even go as far to accuse those opposing the TSA of either being terrorists, or supporting terrorists.

Somebody needs to slap these people with some basic logic... and fast.
 
The "War on Terrorism" is a permanent fixture now. Get used to it. Anyone who thinks that the military-industrial complex is going to willingly let go of this cash cow for a few beans regardless of the efficacy or outcome, then you need to look up our approach to the "War on Drugs".

We're now in a state of perpetual war. Just make sure to keep the checks coming...or else.
 
I take an annual poll among my students to find out which countries they would like to visit... The U.S. always finished second in the poll (after Japan). This year, it came in fifth (France, China and Australia) polled higher this year. I asked why? They said it was because of the harassment at airports that they had heard about from friends who had travelled to the U.S. it is giving the U.S. a bad rap overseas... It makes the US look unhospitable...
 
Hopefully they sue. The government has no business violating your 4th amendment rights.

Has dumb as I think it is to give an extra screening to a 94 year old lady in a wheel chair theres nothing to sue over since her 4th amendment rights weren't violated :shrug:
 
Has dumb as I think it is to give an extra screening to a 94 year old lady in a wheel chair theres nothing to sue over since her 4th amendment rights weren't violated :shrug:

Maybe nothing to sue over, but certainly something to complain about. Unreasonable government force is unreasonable government force.
 
Maybe nothing to sue over, but certainly something to complain about. Unreasonable government force is unreasonable government force.

at least you are starting to get it.
and I have ZERO problems with people COMPLAINING about it and voicing their OPINIONS, I myself dont "like" it.

Ill just never be silly enough to falsely say that its against the law or violates the 4th, not saying YOU did because you did not, im just saying in gerneral ;)
 
at least you are starting to get it.
and I have ZERO problems with people COMPLAINING about it and voicing their OPINIONS, I myself dont "like" it.

Ill just never be silly enough to falsely say that its against the law or violates the 4th, not saying YOU did because you did not, im just saying in gerneral ;)

Yes, well I've never made that point. My argument has always been that there is force clearly demonstrated by the government through TSA and that given the real world data on terrorist attack, we are not reaping significant "safety" benefit from these at best questionable actions. And as such, we shouldn't allow them because we don't need the government to be acting questionably in general, and certainly not when we are reaping little to no benefit.
 
Yes, well I've never made that point. My argument has always been that there is force clearly demonstrated by the government through TSA and that given the real world data on terrorist attack, we are not reaping significant "safety" benefit from these at best questionable actions. And as such, we shouldn't allow them because we don't need the government to be acting questionably in general, and certainly not when we are reaping little to no benefit.

Not in this thread you didnt and the force you are talking about is still nothing more than an opinion. It may even be an opinion I share it still would only make it a shared opinion. :shurg:

and I definitely agree that TSA SAFETY benefits vs non TSA Safty Benefits should be looked at.
Minimum, their training should be increased and audited, more qualified personnel and they should be more PC and up to speed on sensitive situations (disabled, prosthetic limbs etc.)
 
Has dumb as I think it is to give an extra screening to a 94 year old lady in a wheel chair theres nothing to sue over since her 4th amendment rights weren't violated :shrug:

There we go! Ready to ruin another threat now, are you? If there is no warrant, then how is it not unreasonable search and seizure?
 
Link


How about common sense as a security measure.

I am getting mentally prepared to see my daughters (6,7 years of age) be frisked in their private area by some high-school drop out all in the name of homeland security... and to see their rights of being secure violated as well.
 
There we go! Ready to ruin another threat now, are you? If there is no warrant, then how is it not unreasonable search and seizure?

Nope wont be ruined at all unless the 3-4 people that falsely think the 4th is violated try to hijack it again. A warrant isnt needed since there is no force in legality and there is consent in legality. Its these simple facts you cant grasp simply because you dont LIKE TSA policy. News flash, neither do I but my emotions arent mixed in with my logic so I can falsely claim the 4th is violated. I can say I dont like it but that wont make me think illogically. :shurg:
 
There we go! Ready to ruin another threat now, are you? If there is no warrant, then how is it not unreasonable search and seizure?

Because you aren't forced to fly. Unless you are forced to get on a plane and THEN under those circumstances have to get molested, then it's a violation. If you voluntarily sign up to be molested by buying a ticket, then that's on you. Do I think its ridiculous and absurd? I sure do. But is it a violation? No.
 
Not in this thread you didnt and the force you are talking about is still nothing more than an opinion. It may even be an opinion I share it still would only make it a shared opinion.

You say that. But you're still wrong. Whatever. I'm a physicist, I know force when I see it.
 
You say that. But you're still wrong. Whatever. I'm a physicist, I know force when I see it.

im not wrong because there no FACTS there, just our opinions :shrug:
 
Because you aren't forced to fly. Unless you are forced to get on a plane and THEN under those circumstances have to get molested, then it's a violation. If you voluntarily sign up to be molested by buying a ticket, then that's on you. Do I think its ridiculous and absurd? I sure do. But is it a violation? No.


common sense at its finest that will be wasted on about 3-4 people but the rest will get it
 
Last edited:
Because you aren't forced to fly. Unless you are forced to get on a plane and THEN under those circumstances have to get molested, then it's a violation. If you voluntarily sign up to be molested by buying a ticket, then that's on you. Do I think its ridiculous and absurd? I sure do. But is it a violation? No.

I'm not saying it would ever be ruled a violation but I'll note where I wouldn't buy this line of reasoning. You aren't forced to drive either. You can choose to stay home. A police officer can't just pull you over and search you though.
 
I'm not saying it would ever be ruled a violation but I'll note where I wouldn't buy this line of reasoning. You aren't forced to drive either. You can choose to stay home. A police officer can't just pull you over and search you though.

your example is not parallel at all.
Driving in YOUR car/property is not participating in another said service which you KNOW you have to be searched to participate in.

not even close to the same.

If you want close to the same, take your car to private, cooperate property etc where to enter you must consent to being searched or you don't gain access.

Now that is a parallel example and again totally legal.
 
im not wrong because there no FACTS there, just our opinions :shrug:

No. I clearly demonstrated the force. It's not the force which is in contention. It's whether or not one can claim that the force violates the 4th. Well that's the legal sense. It can also be argued that even if it were within the proper confines of the 4th, whether or not the force is even fundamentally reasonable and logically defensible.
 
your example is not parallel at all.
Driving in YOUR car/property is not participating in another said service which you KNOW you have to be searched to participate in.

Only because someone deemed one legal and not the other. What makes the difference in driving or flying concerning your rights? What makes flying so special that you lose them? Terrorists first attempt on the WTT was with a vehicle. The attempt in Time Square was with a vehicle.

What magically changes in between the time you get out of your car and into a line to get onto a plane?

If you want close to the same, take your car to private, cooperate property etc where to enter you must consent to being searched or you don't gain access.

Nobody would argue that a private plane operator couldn't search you either. Our rights protect us from the government, not private individuals.

Now that is a parallel example and again totally legal.

Private vs public is never a good parallel.
 
Nope wont be ruined at all unless the 3-4 people that falsely think the 4th is violated try to hijack it again. A warrant isnt needed since there is no force in legality and there is consent in legality. Its these simple facts you cant grasp simply because you dont LIKE TSA policy. News flash, neither do I but my emotions arent mixed in with my logic so I can falsely claim the 4th is violated. I can say I dont like it but that wont make me think illogically. :shurg:

Sorry about the ruin part. Sincerely. I thought this was in the Basement too. Dude, twice now.

Anyway... I am not going to get into it here with you. I'll jsut stick to the Basement thread. :)
 
Because you aren't forced to fly. Unless you are forced to get on a plane and THEN under those circumstances have to get molested, then it's a violation. If you voluntarily sign up to be molested by buying a ticket, then that's on you. Do I think its ridiculous and absurd? I sure do. But is it a violation? No.

Not technically forced, but we are forced nontheless... what reasonable alternative mode of travel is there for people to visit family and worse, for people "forced" to fly? Unless you suggest that all people quit jobs where employers make them fly, then you are simply wrong. These laws were made illegally AFTER airline travel became the major mode of internal travel. AFTER. Consequently, people ARE FORCED TO FLY.

People can't get off a month to travel by boat around the world to see family. Are people just supposed to say, "oh well"?
 
Back
Top Bottom