• 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!

T.S.A. Expands Duties Beyond Airport Security

gendolookin said:
I'm not sure that opinion is on the fringe. There are a large amount of people that don't like what the US foreign policy is. But that doesn't matter, the politicians will do what they want. When they say "US interests abroad" they really mean, their interest, not the peoples interest.
Click to expand...

Well, the "people" keep voting them into office don't they?
 
MaggieD said:
If you're not doing anything wrong, why do you care about something that has the potential to save your life?
Click to expand...
Stopping me and searching me does not have the potential to save my life.

How many millions of people move through transit systems each day? Out of those, what number (number because it's obviously an incredibly small fraction of a percent) are about to commit some heinous crime of violence?

Are we to give up our rights to go about our daily business unmolested for the chance that is even smaller than the chances of winning the lottery? Sounds like a poor trade, imho.

Next, there's the issue of whether or not giving up these rights would actually have any impact toward making us "safer." Apparently, that question is largely unanswered.

Any power given to the govt actually resides in the hands of a human being. Maybe it's because I have lived certain unfortunate small towns which lead me to be very wary of petty officials wielding authority. Sometimes people act out of their own interests rather than out of the interests of their official duties. Eroding the protections of the individual against the abuse of official power is not a good idea, imho.
 
MaggieD said:
Our rights are in place to protect us. If we don't need protection, we don't need to exercise them.
Click to expand...
The rights aren't there to protect us from officials who're behaving themselves. They're there to protect us from officials abusing their power. Believe it or not, but sometimes officials can be corrupt. When that happens it is very hard for an individual to fight against the powers that be. The harder we make it for individuals to protect themselves from the abuses of power, the worse off we will be.
 
MaggieD said:
If you're not doing anything wrong, why do you care about something that has the potential to save your life? I've never understood the mindset, frankly. If they'd have been in the right place at the right time, the Boston bombing could have been prevented. We live in a complicated world. Strangers are trying to annihilate us. I wish they'd walk around with portable metal detectors. Might get some illegal guns off the streets.
Click to expand...

If one is to live in constant fear, then the terrorists have already won without doing a thing.

Maggie, with all due respect, by seeing this as a good thing it opens the gateway for many more infringements on the Bill of Rights and the Constitution all in the name of 'safety'. Letting a group of bureaucrats make your safety decisions for you is not for your individual protection.
 
[COLOR=#000000 said:
RON NIXON NYT] [/COLOR]The squad was not with the Washington police department or Amtrak’s police force, but was one of the Transportation Security Administration’s Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response squads — VIPR teams for short — assigned to perform random security sweeps to prevent terrorist attacks at transportation hubs across the United States.
Click to expand...
MaggieD said:
If there were a child missing in the neighborhood, you would demand officers have a search warrant to search your home?
Click to expand...
How do you feel about not being able to refuse having your house searched randomly? Not because there's any reason to think that searching your house would yield something of law enforcement value, just because your house was where the dart landed.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
How do you feel about not being able to refuse having your house searched randomly? Not because there's any reason to think that searching your house would yield something of law enforcement value, just because your house was where the dart landed.
Click to expand...


Many in government today already believe that "rights" are merely granted by them as an illusion, and can be sacrificed for the 'greater good' at will. On BOTH sides of the isle.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
How do you feel about not being able to refuse having your house searched randomly? Not because there's any reason to think that searching your house would yield something of law enforcement value, just because your house was where the dart landed.
Click to expand...

But I can refuse. When people should be yelling, screaming and gnashing their teeth is when you can't refuse. And that's not going to happen until we shred the Constitution. I've been on this earth a while now. Never had a problem with a cop. Same with Tom. Same with most of my friends and family. I'm not paranoid about the government like some on this forum are. I don't have issues with authoritarian figures hired to enforce our laws. I respect them. And if I can make their job easier? That's what I'll be doing.

My rights are my rights. It's not mandatory that I exercise even one of them to protect them.
 
j-mac said:
Then it really must irk you that your view politically is on the fringe.
Click to expand...

Being on the "fringe" isn't necessarily a bad thing all the time. At one time, there were "fringe" people that believed the Earth was round instead of flat. Silly them.

What is pathetic and sad is the fact that people still keep voting Dem/Rep even though they have failed this country. Yes, under Obama the debt and government increased more than under Bush. Under Bush the debt and government increased more than Clinton, etc, etc. Well, the people get the government they deserve if they keep voting them in (both sides).
 
MaggieD said:
If you're not doing anything wrong, why do you care about something that has the potential to save your life? I've never understood the mindset, frankly. If they'd have been in the right place at the right time, the Boston bombing could have been prevented. We live in a complicated world. Strangers are trying to annihilate us. I wish they'd walk around with portable metal detectors. Might get some illegal guns off the streets.
Click to expand...

I never understood the mindset of "if you're not doing anything wrong then....". That excuse has led to many infringements on peoples rights. From licensing guns which doesn't do squat to keep guns out of criminals hands to random strip searches in our airports to the NSA doing massive data dumps of information of private citizens private communications.

Just because you may not have any reason to worry about one thing does not mean that you should not worry about all the things together.
 
TheNextEra said:
Now wait a minute. The right was complaining about Benghazi in saying that we "ignored" the warnings, so now that the U.S. hasn't ignored the warnings you think the terrorists have won?

What would happen if Obama let the embacies stay open and there was another attack that Americans die from? The right would have a field day. We can't beef up EVERY SINGLE one of them, so yes I think closing them was an acceptable solution. Would you rather Americans died?
Click to expand...

We have thousands of soldiers out in the field fighting multiple wars which we shouldn't even be in and we can't beef up the embassies that are prime targets? You're joking right?
 
Kal'Stang said:
We have thousands of soldiers out in the field fighting multiple wars which we shouldn't even be in and we can't beef up the embassies that are prime targets? You're joking right?
Click to expand...

How many embacies do we have? How many can Al-Q hit? Yeah, do the math please.

You on the right are complaining about spending so much, this is what you get. Plain and simple we should be closing any embacy in an area that is hostile to the U.S.
 
MaggieD said:
If there were a child missing in the neighborhood, you would demand officers have a search warrant to search your home? See, I find that sickening. If you have drug paraphernalia sitting around, I can understand your reasoning. If you have illegal guns in your home or are running a meth lab, I can understand your reasoning. But to impede an investigation just to protect your rights? That I don't get.
Click to expand...

There is a big difference between allowing cops to seach your home for a possible child kidnapper and searching random people in the "hopes" of "maybe" catching someone doing something illegal.
 
TheNextEra said:
How many embacies do we have? How many can Al-Q hit? Yeah, do the math please.

You on the right are complaining about spending so much, this is what you get. Plain and simple we should be closing any embacy in an area that is hostile to the U.S.
Click to expand...

Embassies are there to try and negotiate peace. Are you saying that we should stop trying to do that? Just keep a perpetual war going? I'd rather we keep them open and beef them up than close them and keep war going.

As for the math...not that hard. We have at least 1 embassy in any given country. Thats 193 embassies. Beef em up by 100 and that is only 19,300 troops. The US has over 1 million troops. We have plenty of people to beef up our embassies plus plenty more to wage those wars Obama has going.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Embassies are there to try and negotiate peace. Are you saying that we should stop trying to do that? Just keep a perpetual war going? I'd rather we keep them open and beef them up than close them and keep war going.
Click to expand...

Do you really think the embacy in Libya or Egypt is doing a damn think to negotiate peace? Sorry, but that is a bill of sale I'm not buying.

Kal'Stang said:
As for the math...not that hard. We have at least 1 embassy in any given country. Thats 193 embassies. Beef em up by 100 and that is only 19,300 troops. The US has over 1 million troops. We have plenty of people to beef up our embassies plus plenty more to wage those wars Obama has going.
Click to expand...

Like Is aid, your answer is just "spend more". You're no different than liberals wanting the government to pay for continued stupidity.
 
MaggieD said:
But I can refuse.
Click to expand...
I know. That's part of the point as to why comparing the random searches in commuter stations to focused searches of your house isn't that helpful.
If the search of your house was random and you couldn't refuse w/o forgoing the service (your house or rail service), then the comparison would be more helpful.

MaggieD said:
Never had a problem with a cop. Same with Tom. Same with most of my friends and family.
Click to expand...
That's awesome. I hope it continues that way for you. That's not the experience of everyone though.
Your lack of problems with cops doesn't do much to assure me that there are not corrupt officials.
 
MaggieD said:
But I can refuse. When people should be yelling, screaming and gnashing their teeth is when you can't refuse. And that's not going to happen until we shred the Constitution. I've been on this earth a while now. Never had a problem with a cop. Same with Tom. Same with most of my friends and family. I'm not paranoid about the government like some on this forum are. I don't have issues with authoritarian figures hired to enforce our laws. I respect them. And if I can make their job easier? That's what I'll be doing.

My rights are my rights. It's not mandatory that I exercise even one of them to protect them.
Click to expand...

Kinda reminds me of that old story about the fellow in Germany. When they came for the Jews he didn't object because he wasn't a Jew. When they came for the next group he didn't object because he wasn't in that group either. Etc, and when they came for him there was nobody left.

What about the law and legal principles Maggie? Do you believe in them? Or is your trust of authority and its beneficence enough for you? They should not be defended, those principles, unless it's in your own personal case, is that it?
 
MaggieD said:
But I can refuse. When people should be yelling, screaming and gnashing their teeth is when you can't refuse. And that's not going to happen until we shred the Constitution. I've been on this earth a while now. Never had a problem with a cop. Same with Tom. Same with most of my friends and family. I'm not paranoid about the government like some on this forum are. I don't have issues with authoritarian figures hired to enforce our laws. I respect them. And if I can make their job easier? That's what I'll be doing.

My rights are my rights. It's not mandatory that I exercise even one of them to protect them.
Click to expand...

You are right you can refuse, right up till you cant. What most people on this forum and in this country fail to understand is that our country is the ONLY country in the world founded on a very unique principle, that is the principle of self sovereignty. That you are the queen of your domain same as the queen of England, with only difference being the number of subjects you have. You just have yourself as a subject. The constitution serves only to CONFIRM that fact and grants nothing. The constitution is simply the treaty by which we determine how we conduct business and resolve problems amongst ourselves PEACABLY. If you wish your rights to be respected you must INSIST they be, or they will not be respected. It may be inconvenient but it is less inconvenient if those with YOUR DELEGATED authority abuse it IN YOUR NAME possibly against you. I wish there was a politician out there that understood and could articulate that concept well so more people would understand truly what it is they give up when they allow their delegated rights to be abused by those assigned by US to HELP protect.
 
TheNextEra said:
Being on the "fringe" isn't necessarily a bad thing all the time. At one time, there were "fringe" people that believed the Earth was round instead of flat. Silly them.

What is pathetic and sad is the fact that people still keep voting Dem/Rep even though they have failed this country. Yes, under Obama the debt and government increased more than under Bush. Under Bush the debt and government increased more than Clinton, etc, etc. Well, the people get the government they deserve if they keep voting them in (both sides).
Click to expand...

Well, you do have a point there, but I wouldn't call people stupid for being caught in the two party cycle, it is after all what they are fed on a daily basis as the only way their voice counts, and most people don't follow this crap like we do.
 
j-mac said:
Well, you do have a point there, but I wouldn't call people stupid for being caught in the two party cycle, it is after all what they are fed on a daily basis as the only way their voice counts, and most people don't follow this crap like we do.
Click to expand...

You're right, the better word would be ignorant not stupid. People have the ability to become informed, they simply don't. I have family members on both the right and left I hate talking politics with because they simply buy into the "sound bites" and "internet chain emails". That is why I think people get the government they deserve.
 
Henry David said:
Kinda reminds me of that old story about the fellow in Germany. When they came for the Jews he didn't object because he wasn't a Jew. When they came for the next group he didn't object because he wasn't in that group either. Etc, and when they came for him there was nobody left.

What about the law and legal principles Maggie? Do you believe in them? Or is your trust of authority and its beneficence enough for you? They should not be defended, those principles, unless it's in your own personal case, is that it?
Click to expand...

I do believe the law and legal principles. I also have trust in our Constitution. And I alsoi realize we live in a very different world in this country today. We have tens of millions of people whose beliefs tell them they should be annihilating Americans...that our way of life is a threat to them. I'm not sure that we haven't lost sight of what it is I personally am arguing. That is that my rights are there. I'm not worried I'm going to lose them like some people are. Because I let a cop search my car doesn't mean I've given up a damned thing. Just because I stop at a checkpoint and get breathalyzed doesn't mean I've given up anything. Search my house. Please. I'm fine with that. This time.

If you don't want to do that? Well, that's fine. Perhaps you and others are like those young people who walked down the middle of Main Street with their AK47's slung on their shoulders -- because they could. Fine. I'm just not that person. And I think the majority of Americans feel pretty much the same way.

And again. Until they shred the Constitution of the United States of America? I'm safe in cooperating. Because if I don't want to cooperate? That document still stands to protect me.

PirateMk1 said:
You are right you can refuse, right up till you cant. What most people on this forum and in this country fail to understand is that our country is the ONLY country in the world founded on a very unique principle, that is the principle of self sovereignty. That you are the queen of your domain same as the queen of England, with only difference being the number of subjects you have. You just have yourself as a subject. The constitution serves only to CONFIRM that fact and grants nothing. The constitution is simply the treaty by which we determine how we conduct business and resolve problems amongst ourselves PEACABLY. If you wish your rights to be respected you must INSIST they be, or they will not be respected. It may be inconvenient but it is less inconvenient if those with YOUR DELEGATED authority abuse it IN YOUR NAME possibly against you. I wish there was a politician out there that understood and could articulate that concept well so more people would understand truly what it is they give up when they allow their delegated rights to be abused by those assigned by US to HELP protect.
Click to expand...

I like your analogy. It is wonderful that we live in a country that has these important protections available to our citizenry. I guess I look at it differently than many. I have a fire extinguisher in my home for my protection, too. But the only time I'm going to activate it is when something's on fire.
 
Maggie

I hate to be the bearer of bad news here, but the Constitution has already been shredded for all practical purposes. Between the Unpatriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, U.S. v. Kelo, the NDAA amendment, and others, constitutional principles are a thing of the past. Constitutional governance is a thing of the past. People can be arrested and detained indefinitely. Exposing government crimes has itself become a crime in the public perception.
 
TheNextEra said:
Do you really think the embacy in Libya or Egypt is doing a damn think to negotiate peace? Sorry, but that is a bill of sale I'm not buying.
Click to expand...

Do you have proof that they are not?

TheNextEra said:
Like Is aid, your answer is just "spend more". You're no different than liberals wanting the government to pay for continued stupidity.
Click to expand...

Hmm...I am against the wars that we are currently in. I would rather we withdraw from all conflicts and only leave enough troops in the various embassies to protect the ambassadors. And I would have no problem slashing our military spending in half, going through our welfare programs with a fine tooth comb getting rid of all those that can work but haven't worked for years, reducing or getting rid of many departments that are not needed and many other things.

Yet you appear to want to get rid of something which is meant to produce peace? Wars cost more money than peace. Who's the one that wants government to pay for "continued stupidity"?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Do you have proof that they are not?
Click to expand...

Hows that going in the M.E. and Africa again? Oh yeah, it's not. The proof is in the conflicts.

Kal'Stang said:
Hmm...I am against the wars that we are currently in. I would rather we withdraw from all conflicts and only leave enough troops in the various embassies to protect the ambassadors. And I would have no problem slashing our military spending in half, going through our welfare programs with a fine tooth comb getting rid of all those that can work but haven't worked for years, reducing or getting rid of many departments that are not needed and many other things.

Yet you appear to want to get rid of something which is meant to produce peace? Wars cost more money than peace. Who's the one that wants government to pay for "continued stupidity"?
Click to expand...

Meant to produce peace? Tell us which embacy has "brought" peace that couldn't have been done in another way.
 
TheNextEra said:
Hows that going in the M.E. and Africa again? Oh yeah, it's not. The proof is in the conflicts.

Meant to produce peace? Tell us which embacy has "brought" peace that couldn't have been done in another way.
Click to expand...

Do you really expect a peace process to work over night in an area that has had thousands of years of conflict? And yeah, sure, other ways can be used to bring about "peace". But are they better ways? Ways in which freedom is still allowed? Ways in which thousands of lives are not taken in a short time span? Or should we just use another A-bomb like we did with Hiroshima?

Anyways, I think we've strayed from the topic of the OP. I'm going to stop responding to this subect in this thread. Want to continue? Start another thread and direct me to it.
 
Jango said:
Yet another governmental agency using the terrorism threat to circumvent the U.S. Constitution and harass American citizens without probable cause.

I sure hope the "I'm okay with it" meme crowd is against these practices.
Click to expand...

I said this sort of thing was coming a long time ago. It's not the first, they have been all over the place, from train stations to bus stations to mobile units that xray vehicles while they are beside them.

MaggieD said:
If you're not doing anything wrong, why do you care about something that has the potential to save your life? I've never understood the mindset, frankly. If they'd have been in the right place at the right time, the Boston bombing could have been prevented. We live in a complicated world. Strangers are trying to annihilate us. I wish they'd walk around with portable metal detectors. Might get some illegal guns off the streets.
Click to expand...

The problem with the 'if you are doing nothing wrong', is that it is the government, who is militarizing, that determines if what you are doing is 'wrong' or not. The way it is supposed to work is you are left alone unless there is a REASON to no do so. They never would have stopped the Boston bombers, they are too top heavy and inefficient, just like most 'government'. Hell, the only reason they found the bomber was due to a private citizen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom