• 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!

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul (R) Detained by TSA.

Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

ThePlayDrive said:
Then I think your assessment of security risks is problematic. But I have two questions:

1. If you were a terrorist aware of increased security for people who look like you in the United States, would you not attempt to get someone least likely to be searched to carry your weapons on board?

2. Are US Senators superhuman in such a way that they are incapable of being influenced by 'the enemy'?
Click to expand...

Yes to both of your questions.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

ThePlayDrive said:
Then I think your assessment of security risks is problematic. But I have two questions:

1. If you were a terrorist aware of increased security for people who look like you in the United States, would you not attempt to get someone least likely to be searched to carry your weapons on board?
Click to expand...

No, I would work to get a missle launcher on a boat near the shore. Maybe work to pull a Timothy McVeigh. Why don't we randomly pull over cars and force a search of them? The risk is there. No?

2. Are US Senators superhuman in such a way that they are incapable of being influenced by 'the enemy'?
Click to expand...

Life is never without any risks whatsoever. When they get so small and we are willing to give up our freedom over such incredibly small risks, I'll pass.
 
Last edited:
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

1Perry said:
No, I would work to get a missle launcher on a boat near the shore. Maybe work to pull a Timothy McVeigh. Why don't we randomly pull over cars and force a search of them? The risk is there. No?
Click to expand...

That is a great point. Heck, I am waiting now for the knock at the front door, looking out to see body armor clad agents standing there to tell me that they are here from the government to help...

Life is never without any risks whatsoever. When they get so small and we are willing to give up our freedom over such incredibly small risks, I'll pass.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it liberals who largely during the initial patriot act kerfuffle were exclaiming such lofty pronouncements as 'no liberty for security', and 'we must not change our every day lives, or terrorists win'....Quoting founders like Franklin, and screaming how Bush was a Nazi for enacting such a draconian measure. But somehow, now it's all just fine, in fact justifying the physical search by low trained, barely screened boobs off the street? This leaves me with one conclusion that is clear...

When the wire tapping issue was there under Bush, oh it was a travesty because it was the actual enemy it was targeting, and liberals had a cow because it was true that they wanted defeat for Bush. Now that it is TSA, and Obama in power, it is perfectly fine for unconstitutional, and extra constitutional things to be considered because after this is Obama in the office for God's sake. We MUST give him what ever he wants, even if the real enemy in his eyes are the American people, and this country's very premise.

j-mac
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

Yes j-mac. I'm more concerned over those who take positions based upon what party is currently in power as opposed to terrorists. This has gone both ways.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

1Perry said:
No, I would work to get a missle launcher on a boat near the shore. Maybe work to pull a Timothy McVeigh. Why don't we randomly pull over cars and force a search of them? The risk is there. No?
Click to expand...
Then I guess you're willing to ignore all the options terrorists might take for the sake of maintaining your argument. We're talking about people who train 10 year olds to kill people. The idea that they wouldn't put some weapon on an eight year old is preposterous.

Life is never without any risks whatsoever. When they get so small and we are willing to give up our freedom over such incredibly small risks, I'll pass.
Click to expand...
Aside from the fact that I think making this a matter of 'giving up our freedom' is hyperbolic, you admit that senators are at risk for being terrorists which makes your original statement that they are "absolutely no risk" false which is what I was looking for.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

1Perry said:
Yes j-mac. I'm more concerned over those who take positions based upon what party is currently in power as opposed to terrorists. This has gone both ways.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I see what you mean, and I am probably guilty of that as well...But at some point we must stop the madness.


j-mac
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

ThePlayDrive said:
Then I guess you're willing to ignore all the options terrorists might take for the sake of maintaining your argument. We're talking about people who train 10 year olds to kill people. The idea that they wouldn't put some weapon on an eight year old is preposterous.
Click to expand...

More so than drive up to a building with a car full of explosives? You didn't address your thoughts there.

Aside from the fact that I think making this a matter of 'giving up our freedom' is hyperbolic, you admit that senators are at risk for being terrorists which makes your original statement that they are "absolutely no risk" false which is what I was looking for.
Click to expand...

I believe the risk is so small to make it not a risk at all. It's like me admitting that there is a risk that I will get hit by a piece of space rubble. Actually, I'd guess that is more likely.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

1Perry said:
More so than drive up to a building with a car full of explosives? You didn't address your thoughts there.
Click to expand...
I think terrorists are willing to try anything to get their goals accomplished including your example. If they want to get as much damage done as AQ did on 9/11, then I see absolutely no reason why they wouldn't consider putting weapons on some 8 year old to get it done. Consequently, the idea that an 8 year old absolutely poses no threat is wrong.

I believe the risk is so small to make it not a risk at all. It's like me admitting that there is a risk that I will get hit by a piece of space rubble. Actually, I'd guess that is more likely.
Click to expand...
We just disagree then. I fly sometimes and the amount of security that I have to deal with is so incredibly minimal that if it helps to prevent the rare event that someone in my plane wants to fly it into the Empire State building, I'm fine with it.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

ThePlayDrive said:
I think terrorists are willing to try anything to get their goals accomplished including your example. If they want to get as much damage done as AQ did on 9/11, then I see absolutely no reason why they wouldn't consider putting weapons on some 8 year old to get it done. Consequently, the idea that an 8 year old absolutely poses no threat is wrong.
Click to expand...

An 8 year old could never have pulled off 9-11. If we randomly search people, why not vehicles?

We just disagree then. I fly sometimes and the amount of security that I have to deal with is so incredibly minimal that if it helps to prevent the rare event that someone in my plane wants to fly it into the Empire State building, I'm fine with it.
Click to expand...

I believe the idea of searching people who have done nothing wrong nor are suspected of doing anything is a much bigger picture arguement.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

MaggieD said:
Well, first of all, he wasn't arrested. Secondly, what makes you think he was headed to or returning from Washington, DC? Now, you may say, "Yes, but he was "detained!" He wouldn't have been detained had he turned around and left the airport. Congress Critters are not immune.
Click to expand...
Even Judge Napolitona made the point. Don't play word games Maggie, detain is enough of the same thing. They stop him from traveling to Washington. Nuff said. This doesn't not look good. Maybe they should scan Barack, Michelle and the kids before climbing aboard AF1. I'll bet that's happening, amiright?
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

1Perry said:
An 8 year old could never have pulled off 9-11. If we randomly search people, why not vehicles?
Click to expand...
I never said an 8 year old could pull off 9/11. I said, "I see absolutely no reason why they wouldn't consider putting weapons on some 8 year old" who wouldn't get checked.

And they do check cars in certain areas just like they check people in certain areas.

I believe the idea of searching people who have done nothing wrong nor are suspected of doing anything is a much bigger picture arguement.
Click to expand...
If people were searched everywhere they go, then yes, that would be a problem. But they aren't. Like I said, the security checks I go through at airports are not a big deal considering what they might be preventing.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

j-mac said:
Wasn't it liberals who largely during the initial patriot act kerfuffle were exclaiming such lofty pronouncements as 'no liberty for security', and 'we must not change our every day lives, or terrorists win'....Quoting founders like Franklin, and screaming how Bush was a Nazi for enacting such a draconian measure. But somehow, now it's all just fine, in fact justifying the physical search by low trained, barely screened boobs off the street? This leaves me with one conclusion that is clear...

When the wire tapping issue was there under Bush, oh it was a travesty because it was the actual enemy it was targeting, and liberals had a cow because it was true that they wanted defeat for Bush. Now that it is TSA, and Obama in power, it is perfectly fine for unconstitutional, and extra constitutional things to be considered because after this is Obama in the office for God's sake. We MUST give him what ever he wants, even if the real enemy in his eyes are the American people, and this country's very premise.

j-mac
Click to expand...
1. Wiretapping and airport security are separate topics. I don't know why you think that someone can be fine with one and not the other, or fine with one under certain restrictions and not the other, etc..

2. You obviously missed it when individual liberal citizens (many on this board) and 'liberal' organizations lambasted Obama for supporting warrant-less wiretapping and detention of individuals (potentially citizens) without a trial. In other words, the whole idea that those who had a problem with Bush don't have the same problem with Obama is just you perpetuating hackish nonsense.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

ThePlayDrive said:
I never said an 8 year old could pull off 9/11. I said, "I see absolutely no reason why they wouldn't consider putting weapons on some 8 year old" who wouldn't get checked.

And they do check cars in certain areas just like they check people in certain areas.
Click to expand...

Sounds like something else I should get upset about. Where are they randomly searching vehicles?

If people were searched everywhere they go, then yes, that would be a problem. But they aren't. Like I said, the security checks I go through at airports are not a big deal considering what they might be preventing.
Click to expand...

Your Constitutional Right against search and seizure does not grant exemptions like this.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

Gina said:
What is Paul's suggestion? He wants to defund TSA to save money as well. So what is it replaced with, because anything that's done will cost money.
Click to expand...

Whatever we had before; go back to that, it's much cheaper.
 
Re: Sen. Rand Paul ‘detained’ by TSA in Nashville, TSA denies

Grim17 said:
the TSA we acting like asses.
Click to expand...

:shock: The TSA? Acting like asses? No, why that's never happened ever at any time anywhere. They're here for our protection, why would they be asses?
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

Manc Skipper said:
Somebody trips a scanner in front of me, and refuses a pat-down should be tazed until he complies, then thrown off the premises.
Click to expand...

Thankfully we're not yet at idiot-ville.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

1Perry said:
Sounds like something else I should get upset about. Where are they randomly searching vehicles?
Click to expand...
I thought they did it at certain government buildings, but I can't find anything online. They also search vehicles at the borders.

Your Constitutional Right against search and seizure does not grant exemptions like this.
Click to expand...
Maybe your interpretation of the 14th amendment doesn't, but mine certainly does.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

ThePlayDrive said:
I thought they did it at certain government buildings, but I can't find anything online. They also search vehicles at the borders.
Click to expand...

Not randomly. At least that I'm aware of and I would be against that. They simply looked underneath ours.


Maybe your interpretation of the 14th amendment doesn't, but mine certainly does.
Click to expand...

I'm betting you'll not find any verification on that either.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

1Perry said:
Not randomly. At least that I'm aware of and I would be against that. They simply looked underneath ours.
Click to expand...
Where? At government buildings or the borders? Because they definitely do random vehicle searches are the borders.

I'm betting you'll not find any verification on that either.
Click to expand...
What do you mean? The Supreme Court has already verified it.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

ThePlayDrive said:
Where? At government buildings or the borders? Because they definitely do random vehicle searches are the borders.
Click to expand...

We were going across the border.

What do you mean? The Supreme Court has already verified it.
Click to expand...

......but the U.S. Supreme Court has never handed down a nationwide ruling on just what privacy rights an airline passenger has. If and when new measures are challenged, a majority of the justices could decide a passenger gives up the "expectation of privacy" -- the key to invoking constitutional privacy rights -- simply by trying to board an airliner.

Read more: U.S. Supreme Court: Showing the naughty bits at the airport? - UPI.com

Or they could rule they don't give up their rights to privacy. The 9th have ruled they do but...........
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

Funny how Rand was going to an anti-abortion rally where everyone thinks there's no right to privacy like the one Roe v. Wade was based on, huh?
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

Bob Blaylock said:
I don't think that would be the last thing. Somewhere well before that would be one passenger killing a whole bunch of other passengers, and destroying one of the Airline's aircraft, along with other property on the ground for which the airline would be held liable.

Give the performance and behavior of the TSA, I would very gladly much rather trust the airlines themselves than the government in this regard.
Click to expand...

That's not what I meant by any stretch. Private companies are notorious for overstepping the boundaries of lethal force in order to protect their assets. Some private employee making 1 mistake would mean a multimillion lawsuit against the company and if the passenger is American, they'd most surely win. Now multiply that by 1 mistake a year (this isn't even the average of **** ups airlines have on their own) and you have a few millions gone down the drain simply on human error. Airlines would either call for the creation of a government agency like the TSA or getting on a plane would be nothing short of a nightmare.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

Bob Blaylock said:
I don't think that would be the last thing. Somewhere well before that would be one passenger killing a whole bunch of other passengers, and destroying one of the Airline's aircraft, along with other property on the ground for which the airline would be held liable.

Give the performance and behavior of the TSA, I would very gladly much rather trust the airlines themselves than the government in this regard.
Click to expand...

The airlines were responsible for security before the TSA was created. Airline-run security was in charge on 9/11.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

misterman said:
Like the kind that failed on Sept. 11?
Click to expand...

Terrorist attacks will happen from time to time. The rules of hijacking were different back then. If you played the good victim, you stood good chance of making it out alive. That's over with now. A few tweaks to the existing system would be all that was warranted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom