• 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

Harshaw said:
What disingenuous horse****.

You won't agree with me because you think this is fine. That isn't going to change.

What actually mean is, you'll agree with ME if I'm "more reasonable" and agree with YOU.

:lamo
Click to expand...

He'll change his mind if the next president is a Republican and continues this policy.
 
Harshaw said:
1) Bull****. This is a TSA measure, not a duly-enacted law.

2) Any law or regulation or action involving a search must absolutely be justified against the 4th Amendment. Merely passing it doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was created [MaggieD adds, "by Congress"] in the wake of 9/11 to strengthen the security of the nation’s transportation systems while ensuring the freedom of movement for people and commerce. Within a year, TSA assumed responsibility for security at the nation’s airports and deployed a Federal workforce to meet Congressional deadlines for screening all commercial airline passengers and baggage. In March 2003, TSA transferred from the Department of Transportation to the Department of Homeland Security.
Click to expand...

You're not doing much for my view of cops and how backwards they frequently seem to understand the relationship between citizen and state. You work for us. We don't work for you.

(Actually, I find that runs about 50/50; about half of the cops I know do take civil liberties very seriously, but I guess we know which 50 you're in.)
Click to expand...

A new CBS News Poll released Monday found 81 percent of Americans think airports should use these new machines -- including a majority of both men and women, Americans of all age groups, and Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike. Fifteen percent said airports should not use them.
Click to expand...

Poll: 4 in 5 Support Full-Body Airport Scanners - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
Factual some can. Even wiretapping can be done under the proper conditions. I don't object with proper oversight, for example. It is all about the circumstance and specifics. This is the problem we always have in these debates, your side tends to treat unlike things as if they are alkike and lump things together as if there is no nuance, all of nothing. it doesn't work that way. Everything is in the details.
Click to expand...

You've glossed over it at least twice now.
You're arguing for some of the most invasive violations of privacy for one of the safest forms of transportation. It's frankly ridiculous that you think getting on a plane is the most vulnerable you're going to be at any given point in your life. Your argument that airplane security can be rationalized because it's been a threat in the past is even further off base. You've never heard of Oklahoma City... Or Columbine? How many planes were involved in those?
Click to expand...

Please, rationalize the above. Where else do you think overly invasive, yet unnecessary security should be implemented?
 
Kandahar said:
Whatever. What percentage of Americans actually fly? Moreover, what percentage of Americans have actually experienced the Federal Nudie Booths and/or Federal Groping, seeing as these tactics have only been out in full force for a couple weeks?

And more importantly, since when are civil liberties subject to a popular vote?
Click to expand...

There are none so blind as those who would not see.
 
MaggieD said:
There are none so blind as those who would not see.
Click to expand...

What a brilliant and well thought-out answer. I guess if 80% of the American people (most of whom never fly) want me to submit to the Federal Nudie Booths, I better comply. That's what democracy is all about. It's not like we have a Bill of Rights or anything. :roll:

I'll tell you what. Whenever pollsters ask this question and the respondent answers yes, it should be accompanied by a groping of the interviewee. Then the respondent can decide if he or she would like to change his answer. If not, the pollster gropes him/her again. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
What a brilliant and well thought-out answer. I guess if 80% of the American people (most of whom never fly) want me to submit to the Federal Nudie Booths, I better comply. That's what democracy is all about. It's not like we have a Bill of Rights or anything. :roll:

I'll tell you what. Whenever pollsters ask this question and the respondent answers yes, it should be accompanied by a groping of the interviewee. Then the respondent can decide if he or she would like to change his answer. If not, the pollster gropes him/her again. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

wpa0649l.jpg
 
Boo Radley said:
I hope you will understand that as long as you use hyperbolic and exaggerated labugae like feeling up and molestation, I can't agree with you. :shrug:
Click to expand...

The fundamental problem here for you, Boo, is that I didn't. The closest I came, at all, was to say that there are those who have gone through it who thought so.

So, all this "hyperbole" bull**** is exactly that. You simply dismiss any argument as such.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
What a brilliant and well thought-out answer. I guess if 80% of the American people (most of whom never fly) want me to submit to the Federal Nudie Booths, I better comply. That's what democracy is all about. It's not like we have a Bill of Rights or anything. :roll:
Click to expand...

No, the rules and regs were put in place by order of the Congress of the United States of America. I merely included the public poll to show that those with strenuous objections are in a definite minority.

@ Harshaw -- just where did I climb into a highchair?
 
MaggieD said:
No, the rules and regs were put in place by order of the Congress of the United States of America. I merely included the public poll to show that those with strenuous objections are in a definite minority.

@ Harshaw -- just where did I climb into a highchair?
Click to expand...

No, Congress created Homeland Security. Homeland Security and TSA wrote the rules and regulations.
 
MaggieD said:
There are jerks everywhere, in every profession, in every corner of the world. To say this is "typical behavior" is just plain reeedickalus.
Click to expand...
Agreed that there are jerks everywhere, but nobody claimed that this was "typical behavior" in 2008. If this behavior is deemed acceptable, we can all be sure that there will be more of it.

I take it from your response that you don't think this was sexual assault or harassment in any way, shape, manner or form, and that you would think a simple complaint to the supervisor would be an adequate response if you were the one who had been victimized.
 
Kandahar said:
And what was wrong with the old security protocols...the ones that DIDN'T involve Federal Nudie Booths and Federal Groping? They've been fine, as there have been only two attempted terrorist attacks out of MILLIONS of flights in the past 9 years, both of which were thwarted by the passengers.
Click to expand...
I think this is a fact that should be repeated a lot more than it is. I trust my fellow passenger to handle a situation a lot more than some TSA flunkie's screening abilities. I suspect the odds are pretty good that on most flights there is at least one military or police member who is trained far better than 90% of the TSA. Plus, the person on a plane with a bomb has a helluva lot more motivation to shut down any incident than a TSA clown on the ground.

For years we were told by the state to acquiesce to terrorists' demands when a hijacking occurs. Obviously that was totally wrong. Now we're being told all kinds of things about this virtual strip search and/or fondling system in place now. Why should I believe any of this?
 
Very true. Last year the underwear bomber was thwarted by a Dutch tourist.
 
We are told that these measures have to be in place because of the underwear bomber, when that man boarded the plane in Amsterdam in the first place NOT here, and Dutch authorities ignored warning signs and red flags including his own father pleading with them to watch out.

This is the "crisis going to waste" theory. And it might interest people to know that not only does former HS Sec Chertoff have a stake in these machines, but up until two days ago so did a company Called OSI, owned and funded by Geo. Soros.

j-mac
 
Didn't Napolitano insist the system worked with the underwear bomber? Yes, yes she did.
 
Kandahar said:
:roll:
How ridiculous. Are you really that concerned about being blown apart at 30,000 feet?
Click to expand...

No, but if I had a choice I'd take the body scan! No brainer!

Kandahar said:
Since 9/11, there have been a total of TWO attempted terrorist attacks on aircraft (out of millions of flights) and they were both foiled...not by the TSA but by the passengers.
Click to expand...

Both were amateur retards and other ones have been foiled but not publicized. What happens when a capable one comes along?

Kandahar said:
And the nudie booths don't even solve the problem of terrorism since a terrorist could accomplish the same thing by blowing himself up in the security line. So basically they're a non-solution to a non-problem...at who-knows-what-cost to the taxpayers, countless hours of wasted time, and an additional affront to our civil liberties.
Click to expand...

So you wouldn't rather we do nothing at all? Where'd that get us on 9/11?

BTW I like that: "nudie booths." :mrgreen:
 
Harshaw said:
Enough. :roll: By this reasoning, if few complain about random searches of homes in any given neighborhood, then it's OK.




:lamo :lamo

Was it the Republicans or the FBI/NSA doing warrantless wiretaps? I didn't know there was a Republican FBI or NSA.

In any case:

2009-12-29-napolitanoj.jpg


This doesn't happen without her approval.





Yeah. You've never engaged in that, ever.
Click to expand...

I wish Obama had given her an official TSA goose. :mrgreen:
 
EnigmaO01 said:
Both were amateur retards
Click to expand...

Well that should tell you something right there. The vast majority of terrorists ARE amateur retards. Quite frequently we can rely on them to give themselves away, aside from ANY security measures.

EnigmaO01 said:
and other ones have been foiled but not publicized.
Click to expand...

What makes you think so? That seems like it would not be an easy thing to keep secret, since court records are public information. Unless of course they were immediately whisked off from the airport terminal directly to Gitmo.

EnigmaO01 said:
What happens when a capable one comes along?
Click to expand...

I dunno, they'll probably blow up a plane. Not worth the hassle, no more often than that happens. I believe that the last time a flight originating or landing in the US was blown up by a passenger was...umm, never.

(And before you ask if you can put a price on security and people's lives, of course you can and should. Any rational government policy should include a cost/benefit analysis.)

Kal'Stang said:
So you wouldn't rather we do nothing at all?
Click to expand...

I'm OK with the metal detectors and some basic profiling for passengers, and the current screening procedures for luggage. Anything beyond that is pointless (and honestly, even a lot of THAT is probably pointless, but I can deal with it). I take the metro every day with no security whatsoever. So far, no one has tried to blow me up with explosives in their shoe, underwear, or any other creative new place to stash them.

Kal'Stang said:
Where'd that get us on 9/11?
Click to expand...

Passengers aren't going to allow planes to be hijacked anymore. Any terrorists on airplanes are only a danger to the people on board the plane.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom