Yes. Because there were supposedly over 900 complaints (half it for ACLU accuracy sakes) and the response BY the TSA and the justice department is to try to slap an 11k fine on a man who opted out of said search.
And said fine was ridiculous and should've been dealth with. In regards to the 900 complaints, my question would be how many complaints were there in each year since TSA came into being? You need more evidence to say that 900 is actually worth while or not. By the way, statistically 900 is miniscule. 190,000 people go through O'hare airport alone in a DAY. Lets say all 900 complaints came JUST from O'Hare and JUST in one week...it'd still mean 1 in every 1500 had something to COMPLAIN about. Not necessarily did something wrong, but to complain.
Now take O'Hare and spread that over to the 21 other Cat-X sized airports in the U.S. If you average 150,000 through them each per day, you're looking at one complaint for ever 15,000 passengers IF all the complaints were made in a single week.
When looked at the sample size the number you're giving is MINISCULE and to imply it as somehow evidence of a wide spread thing is statistically ridiculous.
That is not to say that LEGITIMATE cases of misconduct shouldn't be investigated. It absolutely SHOULD be. However for every legitimate problem, such as the guy who had his bladder bag broken, you have a "Don't Touch My Junk" situation where (up until the fine) there was nothing wrong there.
Reports by named individuals (unlike katrina where it was anonymous reports etc.) who claimed they were groped, singled out for boobage, etc. These are individual incidents that point to a bigger issue within the young TSA. The oversight is lacking, and the response of the TSA and the ADMIN is STFU and do as you are told or face massive fines....
Its still cases of the Media trumpeting up something to make it appear a bigger issue than it is, which raises public hyper awareness of it causing "complaints" to file in that would routinely not raise to the level of needing to do such. And you're also horribly incorrect about the reaction to it. Investigations into some complaints have occured, which is evident in the case of the man being apologized too by the TSA head himself for inappropriate conduct by an agent.
The response isn't to STFU and take it, its to tell people to pleaes deal with it honestly and realistically and to also not try to actively disrupt air travel. With everyone and his brother who has the back of a hand ran down his leg calling it "Groping!" or "Fondling!" its hard to figure out which cases where someone actually LEGITIMATELY did something inappropriate and which cases someone did exactly what they should do but the person having it done is just pissy and doesn't like it.
2nd, what is the probable cause the government agency has to search my 18 month old kid? my wife, and myself? It's unconstitutional.
The same probable cause that allows them to search everyone going into a court house or other federal buildings. Airports are government property. The air that the planes are flying in (at least over U.S. land) is U.S. Government Property. And due to the far higher level of impact on national security and the economy should something disrupt air traffic as compared to disrupting a court room it stands to reason a greater level of searching is needed and is allowed.
I don't compare my brothers and sisters, our war fighters who have massive amounts of training, honor, and a sense of duty, to a minimum wage jackoff in a tsa uniform, I hope you aren't either.
Yeah, I am. A large amount of people is a large amount of people. Isolated incidents blown up in the media represent one large amount of people as much as it represents another large amount of people. But thanks for proving my point down below which you call a strawman. For a different "class" of people you have different rules and views on what is okay to do to them.
point is, I never said in ANY of the military issues that there shouldn't be an investigation, there should be, What I am saying is this **** off attitude of the TSA is an issue.
And where am I saying that there shouldn't be an investigation. I'm saying there shouldn't be the wholesale stereotyping of the entire TSA, the attempt to paint the erronious actions as the norm, or that every flippant complaint should be looked at as if its definitely a violation.
I am sure you have heard be talk about the UN and the brothels, this is akin to that. There are 900 (450 adjusted for aclu hyperbole) complaints. why not a statement from the TSA or the Admin showing they are concerned for our 4th amendment rights, or that they are investigating seriously?
Except they have said and are doing investigations. This is standard process. Where have they made any statement that they will not investigate any of these complaints?
Similar to something we experience on this board...simply because the investigation doesn't come to the conclussion YOU want it to doesn't mean that they're not hearing the complaint.
no, instead they showed us EXACTLY what they were about on thanksgiving when they shut down these "life and death" scanners to avoid a protest. Security, my ass.
The hyperbole on their part about the life and death nature of the scanners is as annoying as the hyperbole about groping and fondling. That said, the amount of potential damage to the economy with massive protests on one of the busiest days of the year likely helped cause the situation to be one where they felt that the need for safety was outweighed. Doesn't make it right, but don't think for a second they turned it off because they really provide no benefit to security.
Built up the strawman zyph, and now knocking it down? :ssst:
See above. And the same thing is happening in the federal employee wage thing. Don't say the rich need to pay more because their evil greedy bastards, that's class warfare. But you're fine to say that federal employees need to get paid less because they're lazy incompotent bafoons. Don't say that the military is a bunch of murderous thugs who are just there to get their jollies because of a few bad apples, but be sure to call all the TSA a bunch of sexual molesting perverted idiots because of it. Certain classes or groups of people are perfectly acceptable for conservatives to belittle, stereotype, and degrade in hopes of turning the public against them to push a political agenda.
When it was my shoes, I was annoyed and didn't care. These full body scanners, violate the 4th amendment, I said so then, I say so now. These invasive pat downs of random folk... Unconstitutional....
What happens when you refuse to take a breathalyzer? It gives them probable cause to take further action. You turn down going through the security in the technical way, they'll check you the analog way. Don't want either? Fine, take a train, bus, or car.
And I'm sorry, am I incorrect in believing you're one of those people pushing for racial, ethnic, or religious profiling? If so, what the hell are you even doing bitching about the constitutionality of these searches if you're pushing for something already deemed unconstitutional?
I didn't realize that all airports were government property or that the government owned ALL the planes in the sky, my bad. :ssst:
Actually...yeah, I believe the vast majority (and all the cat-x airports) are on government land. And yes, the sky over the country at the altitudes the planes fly IS government controlled. While they don't own the planes in the sky, they do own the area the planes are flying in.
Also by that logic, since roads are owned by the precious government, car searches including invasive pat downs for EVERY traffic stop, I mean you voluntarilly drive on thier roads.
Unlike plane travel, an incident with a car is not likely to have nearly the same impact on our national transportation system nor on our economy so the level of search based on the potential threat isn't the same. Additionally the situations of when the searches could be conducted are not the same if you're talking about traffic stops as that is not a universal access point search.
If access to any major highway was limited to specific locations and to go through you were subject to a search of your car and of your person, I'd say that would be perfectly legal to do.
