• 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.

misterman said:
Well, no, most people are not going to just "get over" 9/11, thanks.
Click to expand...

So long as others continue to sensationalize it for political and power gain, so long as we keep encouraging ourselves to turn our backs on logic and reason, then yes we won't get over it. As long as people wish to remain emotional and illogical getting over it is tough. Though I do not believe government policy is best set by the irrational.

misterman said:
Sure, but having to stand in line and take off your shoes and maybe get patted down is not the same thing as thousands of people being killed in horrible explosions that cause the nation to go to war, etc. So get over that.
Click to expand...

No, it keeps getting more and more and more. We have rights for a reason, rights limit government force. So get over that.

Free has never been, is not, and never will be safe. If you don't want to be free, move to Cuba and see what the other side is like. I'd rather live and die free than survive a slave to the state.
 
Re: Rand Paul detained by TSA

Wiggen said:
The apple doesn't fall very far from the tree, does it. I guess there are special rules if you are a Senator, at least in his mind. Not, apparenlty, in the minds of the TSA.
Click to expand...

The only thing special is that he practices what he preaches, unlike so many other politicians, aka windsocks.
 
Blue_State said:
You heard it here. With the creation of the TSA, and the stripping of people's rights, we will never be attacked again.
Click to expand...
When did we hear that? Either I missed that post or you distorted my words in order to avoid dealing with what I actually said.

If you believe we can be attacked again through our airports, then the TSA is a farce and we went the wrong way with a knee jerk reaction.
Click to expand...
I believe we can be attacked again. However, I don't see how that possibility makes the TSA a farce. I believe that someone might get robbed again, but that doesn't mean I think the police force is a farce.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
When did we hear that? Either I missed that post or you distorted my words in order to avoid dealing with what I actually said.


I believe we can be attacked again. However, I don't see how that possibility makes the TSA a farce. I believe that someone might get robbed again, but that doesn't mean I think the police force is a farce.
Click to expand...

Really, that wasn't a distortion of the TSA is perfect. Your words, not mine.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Sure, we were doing 'fine' before them. But your list shows that we were doing perfect after them. I prefer perfect.

As I said, however, I'm not sure if correlation equals causation, but it's entirely possible that it does. In any case, I don't think being patted down in case I have a bomb is a violation of my rights since I think such a search is reasonable.
Click to expand...

Correlation does not equal causation, in fact what you have here is specious reasoning. I have a rock that prevents terrorism on planes, found it after 9/11. Don't see any terrorist attacks on airports around. The fact of the matter is that so long as there are pissed off people out there with little to no political power, there will be terrorism. Some will be directed at us, particularly given our interventionist, military actions. Given enough time, we will see another terrorist attack; terrorist attacks are probabilities and given time all probabilities are realized.
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
So long as others continue to sensationalize it for political and power gain, so long as we keep encouraging ourselves to turn our backs on logic and reason, then yes we won't get over it. As long as people wish to remain emotional and illogical getting over it is tough. Though I do not believe government policy is best set by the irrational.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's irrational. Preventing large-scale terrorist attacks on our vital buildings is a vital national security interest. They hit the Pentagon and likely were after the White House or Capitol too. They hit the heart of our financial district.

No, it keeps getting more and more and more. We have rights for a reason, rights limit government force. So get over that.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. I'm just saying that "get over it" is not a rational argument for how much is too much.

Free has never been, is not, and never will be safe. If you don't want to be free, move to Cuba and see what the other side is like. I'd rather live and die free than survive a slave to the state.[/QUOTE]
 
Ikari said:
Free has never been, is not, and never will be safe. If you don't want to be free, move to Cuba and see what the other side is like. I'd rather live and die free than survive a slave to the state.
Click to expand...
This is the main problem with libertarian arguments. They are built on hyperbolic nonsense. Being patted down is nothing like Cuba and when you make arguments like that, it makes your opinion look retarded because it isn't based in a non-emotional, rational evaluation of reality.

Please explain how being fine with security checks at an airport means that people are willing to let the country turn into Cuba? So ****ing stupid.
 
misterman said:
I don't think it's irrational. Preventing large-scale terrorist attacks on our vital buildings is a vital national security interest. They hit the Pentagon and likely were after the White House or Capitol too. They hit the heart of our financial district.
Click to expand...

They beauty of America is that our politicians are no one special. All can be replaced. There are reasonable actions to take that are within the confines of the Constitution, the flood gates need not be opened. Yet we must temper action with freedom, and this is where we are failing. Mostly due to the fear mongering of terrorism, it's not just related to TSA alone; though TSA is part of the system. It's power grabs by government which erode that which our forefathers fought for. TSA and HLS were not necessary; we already had structures in place. The Patriot Act was not necessary and has only led to abuse. Yet with things such as the TSA, I fear that Americans have become too much like cattle and now it is the government which terrorizes us. Obey the TSA or face its wrath. You may not just be escorted off the property, there's all sorts of nasty little things that can happen to you should you dare raise your voice.

So who are the real terrorists? Or rather, can government itself engage in terrorism against its people? Clearly yes, and clearly it is.

misterman said:
I agree completely. I'm just saying that "get over it" is not a rational argument for how much is too much.
Click to expand...

Just government force abides by and protects the rights and liberties of the individual. If the rights of an individual are unduly violated through law, the law is unjust and must be done away with.
 
Ikari said:
Correlation does not equal causation,
Click to expand...
That's what I said. It doesn't necessarily equal causation, but neither you nor I know if in this situation it does.

in fact what you have here is specious reasoning. I have a rock that prevents terrorism on planes, found it after 9/11. Don't see any terrorist attacks on airports around. The fact of the matter is that so long as there are pissed off people out there with little to no political power, there will be terrorism. Some will be directed at us, particularly given our interventionist, military actions. Given enough time, we will see another terrorist attack; terrorist attacks are probabilities and given time all probabilities are realized.
Click to expand...
I actually don't have specious reasoning because I didn't make a conclusion. I said I'm not sure of correlation equals causation in this case, but it's possible that it does. You seem to think that I've concluded that the TSA is responsible for the 0 terrorist attacks that have happened since 9/11. I'm not sure how you could think that since I specifically said in both of my responses to blue_state that I haven't made that conclusion.

The problem is that I don't know and neither do you or him know whether or not there is any causation associated with that correlation. It also doesn't make sense to say that the occurrence of a terrorist attack would automatically mean the TSA wasn't successful in other instances.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
This is the main problem with libertarian arguments. They are built on hyperbolic nonsense. Being patted down is nothing like Cuba and when you make arguments like that, it makes your opinion look retarded because it isn't based in a non-emotional, rational evaluation of reality.

Please explain how being fine with security checks at an airport means that people are willing to let the country turn into Cuba? So ****ing stupid.
Click to expand...

I would argue it has less to do with the actual pat down, than the reasoning for the pat down. I fly 2 - 3 times a week from Jan - Mar. It isn't a "pat down". It is a solid groping. However, my issue is the violation of the 4th amendment with Sen. Paul just experienced. Actually, they didn't pat him down, so I guess they didn't get to violate an amendment there.
 
1Perry said:
You'll find similiar arguements from all viewpoints.
Click to expand...
Hyperbole can be used with an viewpoint, but I'm talking specifically about this topic. Almost any topic involving freedom requires nearly every single libertarian (not just 1 or 2, the great majority of them) to start ranting about how our freedoms are stake and how people should go to Cuba or some nonsense. It's stupid.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
This is the main problem with libertarian arguments. They are built on hyperbolic nonsense. Being patted down is nothing like Cuba and when you make arguments like that, it makes your opinion look retarded because it isn't based in a non-emotional, rational evaluation of reality.

Please explain how being fine with security checks at an airport means that people are willing to let the country turn into Cuba? So ****ing stupid.
Click to expand...

Cuba is the other side of the coin. It's complete government control. Perchance having my 4th amendment rights violated by TSA does not make us that close to Cuba; but it does mark unjust government force. What we had before was reasonable enough, it does not require the level of force and regulation now levied against us. Whatever small increase in security we may have achieved with TSA was not worth the price paid.

I ask you to go to Cuba to see what the other side is like, see what complete government control will do. For if you do not resist the usurpation of power and the use of force against our rights; we will eventually realize the death of the Republic. Freedom and liberty are what is most important, the very basis of this Republic. I hate to see it thrown away because of emotional and irrational individuals scared that the sky is falling.
 
Blue_State said:
I would argue it has less to do with the actual pat down, than the reasoning for the pat down. I fly 2 - 3 times a week from Jan - Mar. It isn't a "pat down". It is a solid groping. However, my issue is the violation of the 4th amendment with Sen. Paul just experienced. Actually, they didn't pat him down, so I guess they didn't get to violate an amendment there.
Click to expand...
I can understand people disagreeing with the government's handling of airport security. It's the hyperbolic nonsense that gets me every time.

In any case, I just have a fundamentally different viewpoint on this that libertarians. I do not see the TSA's actions as a violation of the 4th amendment because I think that their justification for searches is reasonable.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
I can understand people disagreeing with the government's handling of airport security. It's the hyperbolic nonsense that gets me every time.

In any case, I just have a fundamentally different viewpoint on this that libertarians. I do not see the TSA's actions as a violation of the 4th amendment because I think that their justification for searches is reasonable.
Click to expand...

So a town that had a meth lab in 1982, 1994, and 2001 should conduct searches into everyone's home to make sure they aren't making meth. Would you agree to that if the meth that was made killed 3000 people?
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Hyperbole can be used with an viewpoint, but I'm talking specifically about this topic. Almost any topic involving freedom requires nearly every single libertarian (not just 1 or 2, the great majority of them) to start ranting about how our freedoms are stake and how people should go to Cuba or some nonsense. It's stupid.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, I do kinda dislike seeing a problem get exaggerated.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
That's what I said. It doesn't necessarily equal causation, but neither you nor I know if in this situation it does.


I actually don't have specious reasoning because I didn't make a conclusion. I said I'm not sure of correlation equals causation in this case, but it's possible that it does. You seem to think that I've concluded that the TSA is responsible for the 0 terrorist attacks that have happened since 9/11. I'm not sure how you could think that since I specifically said in both of my responses to blue_state that I haven't made that conclusion.

The problem is that I don't know and neither do you or him know whether or not there is any causation associated with that correlation. It also doesn't make sense to say that the occurrence of a terrorist attack would automatically mean the TSA wasn't successful in other instances.
Click to expand...

Correlation cannot prove causation, which was my point. Maybe TSA had an effect, maybe not. But eventually we will have another terrorist attack That's another point. It's not to say that TSA couldn't be successful, but rather that terrorist attacks will happen eventually. If we freak out each time, we will lose more freedom each time. Instead we may take reasonable actions to protect ourselves from terrorist attack, but we should also understand that they will occur.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
I think that their justification for searches is reasonable.
Click to expand...

Search in general can be reasonable, such as the searches we had before. The degree to which we have gone under TSA is unreasonable.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
I can understand people disagreeing with the government's handling of airport security. It's the hyperbolic nonsense that gets me every time.

In any case, I just have a fundamentally different viewpoint on this that libertarians. I do not see the TSA's actions as a violation of the 4th amendment because I think that their justification for searches is reasonable.
Click to expand...

How is it more reasonable than searching every 10th person in the inner city? It's a very reasonable assumption that a good portion of them would get caught with either, drugs or an illegal weapon. (this is, if Paul is right)
 
1Perry said:
How is it more reasonable than searching every 10th person in the inner city? It's a very reasonable assumption that a good portion of them would get caught with either, drugs or an illegal weapon. (this is, if Paul is right)
Click to expand...

it's too inefficient. What you need to make is a machine which scans everyone and automatically reports to the authorities if they find anything "suspicious".
 
Ikari said:
it's too inefficient. What you need to make is a machine which scans everyone and automatically reports to the authorities if they find anything "suspicious".
Click to expand...

The question is whether or not the TSA is even meeting that standard.
 
1Perry said:
The question is whether or not the TSA is even meeting that standard.
Click to expand...

Essentially they are, and they will try to go in my direction of automated scanning of everyone once tech becomes available. Though it will be expensive. Those millimeter wave radiation scanners are expensive. BTW, we still don't know biologically the full extent of exposure to millimeter wave radiation. Preliminary experiments show that it's rather good at unzipping DNA.
 
Ikari said:
Cuba is the other side of the coin. It's complete government control. Perchance having my 4th amendment rights violated by TSA does not make us that close to Cuba; but it does mark unjust government force. What we had before was reasonable enough, it does not require the level of force and regulation now levied against us. Whatever small increase in security we may have achieved with TSA was not worth the price paid.

I ask you to go to Cuba to see what the other side is like, see what complete government control will do. For if you do not resist the usurpation of power and the use of force against our rights; we will eventually realize the death of the Republic. Freedom and liberty are what is most important, the very basis of this Republic. I hate to see it thrown away because of emotional and irrational individuals scared that the sky is falling.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a slippery slope argument. It reminds of when people say, "If we let the gays get married, then soon, we'll be letting people get married to animals". In my experience, most people in the United States value their freedom. They get pissed when the government restricts where they can protest, they get pissed when the government restricts their gun use and so on. People are very much aware of what government control at the level of places like Cuba entails. Not having a problem with TSA security in a specific venue does not suggest, in any sense, that people need to go to Cuba to understand what 'the other side' is like and to stand up for their rights when they feel that they are being usurped.

What we have here is a disagreement on what 'reasonable' in the 4th amendment means. I think most people in the United States would agree that many actions by the Cuban government go far past 'reasonable'. However, it is entirely understandable that people would have different interpretations of reasonable when it comes to airport security.
 
Ikari said:
Correlation cannot prove causation, which was my point.
Click to expand...
I know it can't. I never said it could.

Maybe TSA had an effect, maybe not. But eventually we will have another terrorist attack That's another point. It's not to say that TSA couldn't be successful, but rather that terrorist attacks will happen eventually. If we freak out each time, we will lose more freedom each time. Instead we may take reasonable actions to protect ourselves from terrorist attack, but we should also understand that they will occur.
Click to expand...
I think the TSA's actions are reasonable. I'm just no buying your slippery slope argument.
 
Ikari said:
Search in general can be reasonable, such as the searches we had before. The degree to which we have gone under TSA is unreasonable.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think it's pretty reasonable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom