- Joined
- Nov 7, 2010
- Messages
- 7,640
- Reaction score
- 2,829
- Location
- Your Head
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Bomb sniffing dogs. They are more accurate than machines, don't see you naked and don't need to feel you up.
Last time I checked this country is at war.
Why are the conservatives joining the anarchists in attacking the people who are trying to keep us safe? It's so wrong.
Why are the conservatives joining the anarchists in attacking the people who are trying to keep us safe? It's so wrong.
TSA must be a subsidiary of al Qaeda.
I haven't been following this whole TSA like . . . at all, but from the scanner photos I've seen, and the pat downs I've been given in the past, I don't object.
It's really not a big deal, people. Unless the guard squeezes my balls and goes "mmm mmm mmm," I can't understand why I should be offended.
LMAO
"violate your person and fondle you"
hahahahahahahahahahaqhahaha
where do you get this stuff? talk about being dramatic its so entertaining I almost want to go back and read the rest of you post its probably hilarious.
the answer is EASY and common sense
1 you arent losing any rights
2. if you want to fly you get the pat downs or what ever they want to do, its a CHOICE you make lol if you dont want to do what they say just dont fly
there is no violation of the constitution LMAO
Why are the conservatives joining the anarchists in attacking the people who are trying to keep us safe? It's so wrong.
We're not at war. Congress never declared war on anyone. Further, even if we were at war, our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights are never to be infringed on. There is absolutely no evidence that anything the TSA is doing is protecting anyone, they have NEVER caught a single terrorist in the act of trying to get on a plane.
Also the dogs, etc... I'm not averse to security, but in other cases like the shoe and underwear bombers, neither of them had to succumb to ANY security screening because men in suits were with them and got them past any security checks... so the whole justification for these body scanners in the first place is just wrong... we should stick with what works and just prevent 'men in suits' from getting people on airplanes without credentials.It just goes to show how asinine and over reacting our government has become since 9/11. I am all in favor of behaviorial profiling and that should definately be used but as for the "let's single him out cuz he is brown" will fail horribly and any white pyscho that wants could go right through. Now if you have a decent sharp person doing behavorial profiling you will save lives, dollars, time, and humility.
Haha, I'm not quite that priapic!There could be a case made here that you may be biased :2razz:
That's what I'm thinking of you too..
YouTube - TSA pulls pants off 71 y/o man with knee implant
YouTube - Woman Targeted By TSA For Cowboys Jersey
YouTube - 'Groped and Poked' by the TSA
YouTube - TSA's New Groping and Fondling Policy
Of course you'll want more... but.... well, I'd say more but I've got enough warnings already.
Prove ANY OF IT WRONG... Especially if it's SO WRONG that it's laughable, it should be easy... or was it more of a 'nervous laughter' because you know what's going on? I mean hell, with your smug superiority complex, it should be based on something factual... which raises the next point, you NEVER DID point out WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION does this allow security agents to molest children, fondle and sexually assault women and men???
Read the bill of rights... 4th amendment.
Again, I have to hold my tongue at you because of warnings... this country follows the rule of law, and the law is in force for everyone equally. This isn't a matter of 'succumb to security or don't fly'... this is like training a dog to be averse to flying.
So, how much is too much?? What could security do that you would say 'wait a second this goes too far'???
Utter fail, but you're happy about it... so carry on in your ignorant bliss.
I wish you would take a less abrasive tone in your posts.ignorant blisss? LMAO pot meet kettle
you arent to bright are you? either that or im guessing your about 17 years old or younger
what type of dramatic fantasy world do you live in? Seems you have a huge issues understanding reality and the constitution.
You made this long post about NOTHING but your dramatic WRONG opinion
the bill of rights isnt violated neither is the constitution genius because you seem to forget one thing, NOBODY IS FORCED hahahahahahahaha that ends the discussion right there and puts egg on your face
these people subject themselves to these searches lmao if they dont want them they dont have to get them.
Where in the constitution does it say I have to where bowling shoes? or a shirt to get service or have a license to drive a car or a million other meaningless stupid pointless examples lol
sorry I choose to live in reality and the constitution is NOT being violated neither is the bill of rights
still laughing at the ridiculous idiotic banter of "Molesting children and sexual assault" LMAO :laughat:
I might have to make room or delete something off my signature to add that glorious line to it
ignorant blisss? LMAO pot meet kettle
you arent to bright are you? either that or im guessing your about 17 years old or younger
what type of dramatic fantasy world do you live in? Seems you have a huge issues understanding reality and the constitution.
You made this long post about NOTHING but your dramatic WRONG opinion
the bill of rights isnt violated neither is the constitution genius because you seem to forget one thing, NOBODY IS FORCED hahahahahahahaha that ends the discussion right there and puts egg on your face
these people subject themselves to these searches lmao if they dont want them they dont have to get them.
Where in the constitution does it say I have to where bowling shoes? or a shirt to get service or have a license to drive a car or a million other meaningless stupid pointless examples lol
sorry I choose to live in reality and the constitution is NOT being violated neither is the bill of rights
still laughing at the ridiculous idiotic banter of "Molesting children and sexual assault" LMAO :laughat:
I might have to make room or delete something off my signature to add that glorious line to it
I wish you would take a less abrasive tone in your posts.
Firstly, because being civil is never a bad thing (almost never?).
Secondly, because an abrasive tone turns many people off even if they agree with you...It just doesn't help your argument, IMO.
Lastly, people who use "LAMO" , "hahahaha...", etcetera in their sentences…Well, it has much the same negative effect.
But all my bitching about your writing and debate styles aside…
I don’t know enough about the relevant laws to say if you or your opponent is correct, but I do know that some of the things I’ve heard about the TSA’s methods leave me wondering why they use those methods…
Not because they are unconstitutional (although they may be), but because they’re (seemingly) stupid methods.
Personally, I like the idea I read somewhere on this forum, which was basically “behavior profiling”.
Now, it seems to me that only a very highly trained and self-disciplined individual could beat that.
My understanding of O-Guru's position is basically that this argument simply doesn't apply, since the person who wishes to travel via air is voluntarily submitting to the "search and seizure”.Thanks.... I'm not averse to having any security at the airports... but there is reasonable and there is pushing things too far... and I think that the american people are speaking quite loudly, in general, that their genitals IS the line in the sand.
Fourth amendment says it quite clearly. You have the right to be free in your persons and property against unlawful search and seizure.... and the laws and the specific charges may vary by state, but I promise you that wherever you live, if you as an individual walk up and touch another person in the genitals OVER the clothes IS an arrestable offence... UNDER the clothes, you'll probably be in jail 5-10 years. If the person you touch is below a certain age threshold then it becomes molestation / pedophilia, etc..
Anyway, even if it is NOT a specific constitutional violation (this WILL be challenged in court, if the cases haven't already started), this is in violation of the law. First, a sworn police officer can ONLY touch your genital area as part of a search in VERY strict and limited circumstance and even THEN it MUST be a same sex officer to remove any sexual connotations. There's gotta be a police officer on the board that can vouch for this...
aka "You are wrong because IMO you are wrong and I decide reality."
Let's see what other gems you have to offer...
Oh, so you're going with the defense that airports are private property... by your stated logic a person could have a free pass as a rapist because he 'never forced the women onto his property'. And Yes, what you are saying IS just that bad...
Wow...
Well, buddy when the biggest part of your genius level argument is "LMAO" because you're barely intelligible otherwise I have to figure out what your argument is... and yes, you're argument boils down to the private property... and yes, owning private property does allow you to circumvent certain laws, BUT that does NOT make the actions on your property ABOVE THE LAW.
And the FACT of the matter is that if a person touches your genital area over the clothes is an arrestable misdemeanor and UNDER THE CLOTHES IS SEXUAL ASSAULT. That is the end of the story. But since you implicitly approve of sexual assault and pedophilia, I don't expect you'll catch on to what is wrong with that situation.
Oh, but it is... TSA is a part of Homeland Security, and therefore an arm of the government, now, what they are doing is searching you, previous to this these searches were reasonable, an x-ray of carry ons and passing through a metal detector. What is going on has gone beyond the point of what any person would deem to be a 'reasonable' search.
Watch those youtube videos and the video speaks for itself... ok, this abuse has been caught on camera.
Ok... so, what else will you accept?
It's your choice to go to the mall, should you be given an x-ray and a full-body rub down before going in the mall?
How about on the bus or train within your city?
Why not just have random home inspections looking for 'contraband'?? I mean, you 'choose' to live in the country, right?
Seriously, how much of a slave are you willing to be in the name of safety?
My understanding of O-Guru's position is basically that this argument simply doesn't apply, since the person who wishes to travel via air is voluntarily submitting to the "search and seizure”.
I don’t know how accurate that is…Has anyone, upon being told they had to go through this, simply said “well then, I’m going home now” – and been allowed to leave?
Damnit, I don’t know enough about this area of the constitution/law to know…
And besides, multiple people probably didn’t want to lose their money that was spent on the airline ticket…
Thanks.... I'm not averse to having any security at the airports... but there is reasonable and there is pushing things too far... and I think that the american people are speaking quite loudly, in general, that their genitals IS the line in the sand.
Fourth amendment says it quite clearly. You have the right to be free in your persons and property against unlawful search and seizure.... and the laws and the specific charges may vary by state, but I promise you that wherever you live, if you as an individual walk up and touch another person in the genitals OVER the clothes IS an arrestable offence... UNDER the clothes, you'll probably be in jail 5-10 years. If the person you touch is below a certain age threshold then it becomes molestation / pedophilia, etc..
Anyway, even if it is NOT a specific constitutional violation (this WILL be challenged in court, if the cases haven't already started), this is in violation of the law. First, a sworn police officer can ONLY touch your genital area as part of a search in VERY strict and limited circumstance and even THEN it MUST be a same sex officer to remove any sexual connotations. There's gotta be a police officer on the board that can vouch for this...
Found this interesting reading: Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediawell thats a grey area, since you KNOW you are going to be searched, if you make it that far and THEN change you're mind im sure you will be forced because now you have given enough suspicious reason to be forced. Just like If i identify myself has the police and you run thats reasonable suspicion. now I guess you could argue and say "i didnt know" but im guessing that wouldnt work because at this point who doesnt know
also and anyone feel free to correct me but i read that you have to get metal or xray and if you refuse either THEN you get "molested" but like I said not sure if thats actually how it works, nor do I really care because I have ZERO problems with the policies, I fly often but havent in few months cause my flying is usually feb-jun at least once a month for work.
Found this interesting reading: Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I’m sure many people don’t know – but the majority likely do, I agree.
Still, suppose the following:
Person A does not want to be searched, and has heard about said searches in detail, and so forth.
Person A wants’ to travel via air.
Person A goes to the airport and tells the security staff something like “I’ll submit to the scans and such, but not the pat-down and “fondling”, so if your scans find something they are interested in, I’m heading home”.
Now, Person A has not submitted to the “search and seizure” voluntarily, have they?
Or are the scans considered a “search”?
Damnit…
So, taking my limited understanding of the law into account, would they be within their rights to go through security to the point of being asked to submit to a “invasive pat-down”, and then tell the TSA people “nope, I’m not allowing that, and if you insist on it I’m just going to leave”?
It seems a gray area…
If the “search and seizure” is determined to have started when they entered the security check-point, were they “voluntarily” submitting to it?
And if they resist part-way through, can they be forcibly submitted to it? Or is it like the right to silence, which if I understand correctly (from TV shows, movies, and fiction books, I admit) can be applied at any point?
Now, if the TSA agents have “probable cause”, can they forcibly search someone?
I’m not too clear on this whole thing…
more dramatics, it must be terrifying living in your world, your ramblings dont even make sense, could you be any more void of logic?
nobody is being FORCED thats the end of the discussion lol
when you have something logical please let me know, save the drama for the theater
dont like it dont fly
Wait, in your mind, a person who has 8 years minimum of training, and has demonstrated a mastery in his field before being allowed his credentials and has ethical guidelines and procedures through which to act is comparable to an entry-level minimum wage person given a badge?? When a dr touches you in ANY WAY he first tells you what he's going to do, and is doing so analytically, professionally.I could think like you and give stupid examples too if you like
- nurses and doctors molest me
- so does my physical trainer
- my daughters coach molest her when they stretch her out or tell me how she has "filled out" perverts!
- the bowling alley violates the constitution because the make me where bowling shoes, no where in the constitution does it say i have to do so IT DOESNT!
_my nephew went to a school where they had metal detectors and would pat him down, WHAT HAPPENED TO INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!!!! another constitution violation!!! and when I go to the hockey and football games they do the same thing!!!!!!
- when i interviewed for my job i had to get a physical, some "hired help" took blood and urine from me then she told me to drop my pants and fondled my privates saying she was checking for disease and hernia, YEAH RIGHT i know she assaulted me!!!!!
LOL see how dumb that is?
while these are all true stories I choose to live in reality and not jump off the deep end into a world of fantasy, hysteria and the ever so popular "slippery slope" argument sorry I pick logic and rational thinking or emotional dramatics seems like we'll just always disagree on this since you choose the later:2wave: