• 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!

TSA ejects Oceanside man from airport for refusing security check

And Napolitano said "if you don't like it, you're free not to fly."
 
Janet From Another Planet **is** a joke, but now she seems to have her own panties in somewhat of a twist... :lamo

TSA to investigate body scan resister

The Transportation Security Administration has opened an investigation targeting John Tyner, the Oceanside man who left Lindbergh Field under duress on Saturday morning after refusing to undertake a full body scan.

Hell hath no fury like an officious bureaucrat held up to ridicule.
 
Actually, the proper quote was "And if people don't want to play that role, if they want to travel by some other means, of course that's their right."
 
Janet From Another Planet **is** a joke, but now she seems to have her own panties in somewhat of a twist... :lamo

TSA to investigate body scan resister



Hell hath no fury like an officious bureaucrat held up to ridicule.






They are in serious need of disbanding, these jack booted thugs are the antithesis to the American Ideal.
 
The guy's a total idiot. I hope they file a suit against him.

If the entire purpose we put up with screening is airline safety, and he isn't getting on a plane, then what possible purpose could be served by dragging him back to finish the screening? What, other than showing him who's boss?
 
If the entire purpose we put up with screening is airline safety, and he isn't getting on a plane, then what possible purpose could be served by dragging him back to finish the screening? What, other than showing him who's boss?

As I posted earlier, how much trouble would TSA be in if he'd have left the screening area (told he could, but apparently by mistake) and walked 200 feet and blown up a ticket counter?

I see now by a post a few back that the TSA is actuallly investigating the guy with an eye toward a large fine. That will be interesting. IMO, if they don't take a hard stand, they may as well fold their tents and go home.

If the young man gets an attorney, he'll pay a "fine" whether or not it's to the TSA.
 
As I posted earlier, how much trouble would TSA be in if he'd have left the screening area (told he could, but apparently by mistake) and walked 200 feet and blown up a ticket counter?

I see now by a post a few back that the TSA is actuallly investigating the guy with an eye toward a large fine. That will be interesting. IMO, if they don't take a hard stand, they may as well fold their tents and go home.

If the young man gets an attorney, he'll pay a "fine" whether or not it's to the TSA.

If he's suspected of wanting to blow up a ticket counter, that requires a warrant. Scans are permissible without one only because of the danger involved in air travel.
 
As I posted earlier, how much trouble would TSA be in if he'd have left the screening area (told he could, but apparently by mistake) and walked 200 feet and blown up a ticket counter?
If they suspected him of such, they would have had sufficient probable cause for an arrest. Otherwise, they should have let him go unmolested.
I see now by a post a few back that the TSA is actuallly investigating the guy with an eye toward a large fine. That will be interesting. IMO, if they don't take a hard stand, they may as well fold their tents and go home.
So it is more of a "respect mah authoritah" thing? I would hope not ...
 
If they suspected him of such, they would have had sufficient probable cause for an arrest.

Maybe reasonable suspicion, but not probable cause. Probable cause requires evidence other than getting pissed off about an overly-invasive search.
 
Maybe reasonable suspicion, but not probable cause. Probable cause requires evidence other than getting pissed off about an overly-invasive search.
Reasonable suspicion is in order to execute a Terry stop-and-frisk? I don't remember any more ...
 
Yep, Terry stop. And they'd have to have specific, articulable facts to do it. Again, I don't think getting pissed off about an invasive, embarrassing search is enough to reasonably suspect he's going to blow up the ticket counter. And even if they did, the scan-and-grope most likely goes beyond the stop-and-frisk which is allowed. But then, it's new and hasn't been tested.
 
Yep, Terry stop. And they'd have to have specific, articulable facts to do it. Again, I don't think getting pissed off about an invasive, embarrassing search is enough to reasonably suspect he's going to blow up the ticket counter. And even if they did, the scan-and-grope most likely goes beyond the stop-and-frisk which is allowed. But then, it's new and hasn't been tested.

IDK, a friend of mine in highschool objected to having his car searched. The police searched his car anyways and found some weed. The officer's reasoning? He objected too vigorously, thus giving the officer probable cause for a vehicle search...
 
IDK, a friend of mine in highschool objected to having his car searched. The police searched his car anyways and found some weed. The officer's reasoning? He objected too vigorously, thus giving the officer probable cause for a vehicle search...
On those facts even a public defender could get that evidence tossed.
 
On those facts even a public defender could get that evidence tossed.

He got a public defender and it stuck. I know, it's hard to believe, I've told the story to a number of people that didn't believe me, but the officer in court essentially said that my friend got irate at the idea of the police searching his car, giving the officer probable cause. The original stop was just for a speeding ticket. I'm still pretty amazed at the idea.
 
I am going to demand a pat down search every time I fly from now on but I plan to insist on being patted down by a young BABE.

I understand Janet Napolitano was overheard saying the very same thing word for word.

nun_ruler1.jpg

You think you're going to touch MY junk Bitch? Guess again!
 
Last edited:
I am going to demand a pat down search every time I fly from now on but I plan to insist on being patted down by a young BABE.
I think it's only fair that we get a happy ending, too. It would make all the time spent standing in line a great deal easier to handle.
 
For you and your way of thinking the dead and maimed... all the suffering at the hands of these Islamofacists is a mere Asterisk.

It's PC crap like this that resulted in the Ft. Hood killings. We are at war with a known quanitiy and we know it's major source. It's not Nuns, and it's not the September 10, 2000 world we're living in.

To stick your head in the sand when a known section of society is responsible for these attacks is utter suicide. I guess you think El Al Airlines should stop profiling too. If their screeners don't... they're fired, and they haven't had a terror attack upon their flights. They are brutally thorough, but we should simply ignore the greatest warning sign.

We are no less hated than the Jews by these idiots in case you haven't noticed.

Face palm city.

.

It has nothing to do with "PC" and everything to do with having just a little respect for our Constitution and the ideals that America stands for. I can never understand people such as yourself that willingly hand over our values and give the terrorists a victory for a little false sense of security.
We can't stop living our lives because we are afraid of being attacked by a group of extremists. Reasonable efforts should be applied but life has risks and I'm not willing to forfeit our American way of life and the principles of our Constitution to a bunch of radicals. Sorry....but that's just me.
 
As I posted earlier, how much trouble would TSA be in if he'd have left the screening area (told he could, but apparently by mistake) and walked 200 feet and blown up a ticket counter?
They are not responsible for keeping the ticket counter or even the screening area free from bombs. If they were, you would get screened before you walked into the airport. They're responsible for gates and planes.
 
My Parents are supposed to be flying to Puerto Rico this week, wonder if some TSA punk will get my mothers wedding ring in his skull. Granted in my opinion a punch its not a suitable punishment for a government thug.
 
Last edited:
How is racial profiling wrong and unconstitutional but groping and nude scanning is fine?
 
Probably because our society is becoming more and more screwed up.
 
I am not flying to the US with my family anytime soon with these regulations in place. If we have to visit family in NH, we will fly into Montreal rather than Boston to avoid this crap. And vacations??? Not to the us, we will stay in East Asia where we can avoid this idiocy...
 
These idiotic security procedures serve no purpose. Putting aside the obvious fact that they're a disgusting affront to civil liberties, they don't even prevent terrorism. What's to stop a terrorist from just blowing up a bomb while he stands in line waiting for the security check? As Jeff Goldberg at The Atlantic correctly noted, "The coiled, closely packed lines at TSA screening sites are the most dangerous places in airports, completely unprotected from a terrorist attack -- a terrorist attack that would serve the same purpose (shutting down air travel) as an attack on board an aircraft."
 
Back
Top Bottom