• 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 Could Ban Flights From Texas If State Passes Anti-Patdown Law

The people who are actually calling the shots are smart enough to realize that grounding every flight from Texas would be devastating to the economy, to transportation, and to people's schedules. And if they aren't, then their superiors will replace them.
Click to expand...

Something will either be worked out or this protest law will initiate some sort-of legal technocratic shutdown. I think texas would be taking the fall for this one and it stands to lose the most. It wont happen though.
 
Kandahar said:
I call bull****. There is no way the TSA is going to cancel every flight originating from Texas. To even issue this kind of empty threat is beyond retarded. Hopefully Texas passes their law and tells the TSA to go **** themselves.
Click to expand...

WTF?

Since Texas is a huge border state and this is where a lot of illegals (and I'm not just referring to mexicans with this - but international illegals like iraqi, pakistani, etc) are coming from then they, as opposed to other states like Maine or Maryland - should HAVE a patdown.

You know - are they trying ot fight dangerous people of this ilk or not? sometimes they seem gung-ho about stopping terrorists and such and sometimes they don't.
 
Kandahar said:
I call bull****. There is no way the TSA is going to cancel every flight originating from Texas. To even issue this kind of empty threat is beyond retarded. Hopefully Texas passes their law and tells the TSA to go **** themselves.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't feel sorry for Texas if they shut down their flights. They patted me down in Texas and went through all my stuff with plastic gloves, made me unzip my bags and everything. This was before the TSA got involved and before the Obama Admin. They made us miss our flight. **** Texas.
 
ludahai said:
Totally with you on this one. NH also considered it, but with a veto threat from the governor. However, with only one significant airport, the state doesn't have much leverage. TX is much larger with many more significant airport...
Click to expand...

I read the article, and it doesn't seem like they are making exceptions to allow a pat down which doesn't seem right. It's Texas and they are on the boarder, so I'd think there might be some drug mules flying in a out. It seems like a pat down would be necessary in some instances and they can't outright ban it.
 
Texas is the most arrogant state in the union... lol. Somebody should remind them that they're not better than the other 49. :2mad:
 
SheWolf said:
I read the article, and it doesn't seem like they are making exceptions to allow a pat down which doesn't seem right. It's Texas and they are on the boarder, so I'd think there might be some drug mules flying in a out. It seems like a pat down would be necessary in some instances and they can't outright ban it.
Click to expand...

Yes, it may be necessary in some instances. As in, instances in which there is probable cause. The proposed law would not ban patdowns at the airports if there is probable cause.
 
SheWolf said:
Texas is the most arrogant state in the union... lol. Somebody should remind them that they're not better than the other 49. :2mad:
Click to expand...

I don't see where they claimed to be. The other 49 states can do whatever they want...but in Texas, the government wouldn't be able to subject people to invasive searches without probable cause.
 
SheWolf said:
I wouldn't feel sorry for Texas if they shut down their flights. They patted me down in Texas and went through all my stuff with plastic gloves, made me unzip my bags and everything. This was before the TSA got involved and before the Obama Admin. They made us miss our flight. **** Texas.
Click to expand...

I doubt that had anything to do with the State of Texas. If it was since 9/11, it was most likely the federal government.
 
O_Guru said:
Can't wait for the TSA either to ground all flights, introduce the state troopers to the FBI or simply not allow any crybaby that cries about the rules access to fly.
Click to expand...

You mean people like you, who seem to be crying and moaning because people are actually saying "Woah now, lets scale this back to something that seems more proportionate to the threat that exists here and follows our laws," challenging it instead of just saying "Ok? and accepting it as-is?

Get real.

Seriously, you and your ilk, the arrogance is really getting annoying. The condescending attitude towards those who merely disagree with the approach to airport security though may agree with the idea in of itself even to the point of painting a gross mischaracterization as if it made you folks look smart.

Really.

The problem is with the pat down method, and there is nothing wrong with saying that something doesn't seem right, even to take action and demand answers, proof that it is constitutional, safe, effective. It doesn't make you a coward, nor does it make a sniveling whatsit, it makes you somebody who is skeptical [reasonability of course being wholly dependent on how you go about asking the questions].

The scanners, and the pat downs have never been implemented before in the U.S, we've never had anything quite this invasive up until 8 years after 9-11, do you REALLY think people are not going to question its worth, invasiveness, constitutionality, or speak up, that everybody will just take it, and accept it at face value? Especially when operated by the undertrained, and infamously incompetent TSA agents, part of the larger TSA agency that has proven to have expressed [in some capacity] a strong hate towards accountability?


And just because YOU say it doesn't act as a violation to have the TSA's brand of patdowns doesn't make it so, you need to prove it just as much as those opposed to it need to prove / demonstrate its overly intrusive nature - and I say those opposed have done a far better job at that.
 
Last edited:
"Woah now, lets scale this back to something that seems more proportionate to the threat that exists here and follows our laws,"
Click to expand...

LoL Conservatives arguing that the perception of the threat of terror needs to be scaled back thats rich.
And me a 'liberal' having to come up and remind you people are stuffing bombs in their underwear. :roll:
 
SE102 said:
LoL Conservatives arguing that the perception of the threat of terror needs to be scaled back thats rich.
And me a 'liberal' having to come up and remind you people are stuffing bombs in their underwear. :roll:
Click to expand...

There has been a total of ONE guy in the history of aviation who has stuffed a bomb in his underwear, and a total of ONE guy in the history of aviation who has stuffed a bomb in his shoe. And neither of them were stopped by the TSA's security theater anyway, they were both stopped by the passengers on the planes.

How about we take all the money being spent on keeping people from blowing up airplanes, and spend it on something that will actually save a lot more lives. Research on heart disease or cancer, perhaps. And let's just accept the fact that a plane might occasionally be blown up, and trust the passengers to prevent it as best they can. That would be far more prudent than the ridiculousness that is a TSA checkpoint today.
 
Kandahar said:
There has been a total of ONE guy in the history of aviation who has stuffed a bomb in his underwear, and a total of ONE guy in the history of aviation who has stuffed a bomb in his shoe. And neither of them were stopped by the TSA's security theater anyway, they were both stopped by the passengers on the planes.

How about we take all the money being spent on keeping people from blowing up airplanes, and spend it on something that will actually save a lot more lives. Research on heart disease or cancer, perhaps. And let's just accept the fact that a plane might occasionally be blown up, and trust the passengers to prevent it as best they can. That would be far more prudent than the ridiculousness that is a TSA checkpoint today.
Click to expand...

I like you, kandahar but this was a little doofy. It is because they NOW screen underwear and NOW screen shoes that it likely wont happen again. Of course they got through before they screened for them. If the TSa is illegalised in texas they will run into the same conundrums the TSA has. The checkpoints are a deterrent. Accept the fact that a plane might occasionally be blown up? Prudent? Pass the doob on that one bro. =\
 
Having dealt with the TSA in a capacity other than just a passenger, it is my opinion that they are an unmonitored, unfettered monstrosity that threatens the freedoms of the flying public to include airlines and private aircraft.
 
Travelsonic said:
You mean people like you, who seem to be crying and moaning because people are actually saying "Woah now, lets scale this back to something that seems more proportionate to the threat that exists here and follows our laws," challenging it instead of just saying "Ok? and accepting it as-is?

Get real.

Seriously, you and your ilk, the arrogance is really getting annoying. The condescending attitude towards those who merely disagree with the approach to airport security though may agree with the idea in of itself even to the point of painting a gross mischaracterization as if it made you folks look smart.

Really.

The problem is with the pat down method, and there is nothing wrong with saying that something doesn't seem right, even to take action and demand answers, proof that it is constitutional, safe, effective. It doesn't make you a coward, nor does it make a sniveling whatsit, it makes you somebody who is skeptical [reasonability of course being wholly dependent on how you go about asking the questions].

The scanners, and the pat downs have never been implemented before in the U.S, we've never had anything quite this invasive up until 8 years after 9-11, do you REALLY think people are not going to question its worth, invasiveness, constitutionality, or speak up, that everybody will just take it, and accept it at face value? Especially when operated by the undertrained, and infamously incompetent TSA agents, part of the larger TSA agency that has proven to have expressed [in some capacity] a strong hate towards accountability?


And just because YOU say it doesn't act as a violation to have the TSA's brand of patdowns doesn't make it so, you need to prove it just as much as those opposed to it need to prove / demonstrate its overly intrusive nature - and I say those opposed have done a far better job at that.
Click to expand...

WOW looks like I have a live one lol
That's a nice long post that said absolutely nothing just a rant and you wrongly assuming you know what I was saying and how I feel.

I'm fine with people NOT liking it, I don't " like it", I'm fine with people questioning it but the people that cry its sexual assault and kiddie porn and it violates the constitution I just laugh at because those people are part of the problem not the solution.

Solution is simple, don't like it, don't fly, want the rules changed, fine do it the right way but as soon as a person says moronic stuff like its rape and sexual assault and kiddie porn and violates the constitution you will simply get laughed at and loose all credibility like you should.

DO you want better regulation, training, qualified personnel etc that's all fine the rest is dramatic lunacy.

Nice try the only one crying is you, I'm laughing at those crying :D

There's no violation.
 
Kandahar said:
I call bull****. There is no way the TSA is going to cancel every flight originating from Texas. To even issue this kind of empty threat is beyond retarded. Hopefully Texas passes their law and tells the TSA to go **** themselves.
Click to expand...

Hopefully Texas does pass this law. The government has no business violating the 4th amendment.
 
MistressNomad said:
I never thought I'd say this, but... go Texas. Yee-ha.

The TSA is hugely over-stepping. They should not be able to grope people for practically no reason. These "safety" measures don't work, and they're abusive. Same with the body scanner that renders a friggin' naked image of you.

I know it has some practical impediments, but look to Israel for a system that works. And they don't have to strip or grope anyone. It's basically a system of interaction and judging normal levels of suspect behavior. It works incredibly well - Israel has some of the best airport security in the world - and it doesn't require them to strip and prod people. A copy-cat of their system won't quite work here, but it's an excellent model. We should take a good long look at it, and figure out how to make it work here.

In the mean time, for once, I support Texas. The TSA can shove it.
Click to expand...

1) The body scanners don't show naked bodies, they show a thermal scan. All you get is an outline
2) Israel's security is also extremely expensive and would not scale for the US. They hire a dozen or so people to ask questions in a check off fashion. If something is triggered, they have another person ask questions who is trained in lie detecting. If you fail that test, you are then subjected to the same type of searches that we have, is not more
3) The searches are not unreasonable, but they aren't done with enough... partiality. I mean they check little kids.

I don't understand why people are so uptight about the body scanners though.
 
jamesrage said:
Hopefully Texas does pass this law. The government has no business violating the 4th amendment.
Click to expand...

The 4th isn't being violated in any fashion shape or form since the search is not forced and agreed upon. You submit to the search for the privilege to fly, don't want searched, don't fly, the 4th is not being violated.

Again if you don't like what the TSA is doing (I'm not to fond of it myself) by all means fight it but using the 4th will only cause you to fail.
 
Last edited:
I flew from CVG to Bradley this weekend. In CVG I went through the scanners. I had some bills in my pocket

the TSA guy was very courteous and said he had to pat down my front right pocket

I thought I was treated with respect

at Hartford it was just a metal detector

the TSA officers appeared to be friendly, efficient and courteous
 
SE102 said:
LoL Conservatives arguing that the perception of the threat of terror needs to be scaled back thats rich.
Click to expand...

Well, considering we are groping kids, and doing digital strip searches where drug/bomb sniffing dogs, and good profiling [not purely racial, but by various factors - like Israel does it] in response to two thwarted plots in the 10 years after 9-11 that were stopped by the passengers, could not have been stopped by these methods, and have not been successfully followed up yet... I'd say the threat perception is in need of calibration myself.

SE102 said:
And me a 'liberal' having to come up and remind you people are stuffing bombs in their underwear. :roll:
Click to expand...


1 person [singular] a year and a half ago. =/= people in the plural in the now, unless there is something you know that we all don't. Get a grip, will you? It is one thing to be shaken up right after it happened - at least I'd cut you some slack on that front, but now you're just dishonestly taking one event some time ago, and blowing it up in scale to claim that there is a constant barrage in the last few weeks/days/months, when the last incident of its kind happened a year and a half ago, if not longer, and failed - being thwarted by the passengers [not the TSA :p].




TurtleDude said:
I flew from CVG to Bradley this weekend. In CVG I went through the scanners. I had some bills in my pocket

the TSA guy was very courteous and said he had to pat down my front right pocket

I thought I was treated with respect

at Hartford it was just a metal detector

the TSA officers appeared to be friendly, efficient and courteous
Click to expand...


You were fortunate, as was I traveling out of Tampa this past winter when all I had to do was go through the detector, and experienced only friendly people.

It does not however, IMO of curse, negate any of the real issues that are popping up - which, if you follow the news, can see is quite plentiful.
 
Last edited:
SE102 said:
I like you, kandahar but this was a little doofy. It is because they NOW screen underwear and NOW screen shoes that it likely wont happen again. Of course they got through before they screened for them.
Click to expand...

And what makes you think that dedicated terrorists won't be able to figure out some new creative way to sneak stuff onto an airplane? Screening for what the LAST guy used is pointless, because it has no relationship with what the NEXT guy will use.

SE102 said:
If the TSa is illegalised in texas they will run into the same conundrums the TSA has. The checkpoints are a deterrent.
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, there have been at least two terrorists who got through security with the intent of blowing up a plane, but I'm yet to see the TSA regulations thwart a single attack. Now, you can say that maybe we don't hear about them, and that would be valid...except for the fact that arrest logs are public information, and "TSA thwarts bomber" would have almost certainly become a national headline.

Now, as for it being a deterrent: In order for a deterrent to be effective, people must believe that they will get caught. The TSA is 0 for 2 in this, and I see no reason to expect their record to improve since they focus their efforts on the ways in which the LAST guy got on to the plane. This means that two people have already thought of security flaws that the TSA did not. They are hardly the most innovative government agency.

SE102 said:
Accept the fact that a plane might occasionally be blown up? Prudent? Pass the doob on that one bro. =\
Click to expand...

Why not? You accept the fact that people will die of heart disease, die of cancer, die in automobile accidents, or whatever. The only difference is that vastly MORE people die of those things than die from plane bombings...and it's far cheaper to save lives by focusing on those areas. Spending such an inordinate amount of time, money, and liberty on airport security is completely irrational.
 
TurtleDude said:
I flew from CVG to Bradley this weekend. In CVG I went through the scanners. I had some bills in my pocket

the TSA guy was very courteous and said he had to pat down my front right pocket

I thought I was treated with respect

at Hartford it was just a metal detector

the TSA officers appeared to be friendly, efficient and courteous
Click to expand...

I fly pretty often for your avg joe, at least 4 times a month usually sept thru march and I have experienced the same.

While I do feel better training, qualified personnel could be used for those stories of "insensitivity" or abuse that happens, and it happens with just about everything. I do feel our system could be improved, I'm in no rush to change anything until a total game plan that is proved =/> and is ready to be laid out.
 
Just like the DEA can swoop in and bust people for marijuana.

Deal with it.
 
O_Guru said:
Solution is simple, don't like it, don't fly, want the rules changed, fine do it the right way but as soon as a person says moronic stuff like its rape and sexual assault and kiddie porn and violates the constitution you will simply get laughed at and loose all credibility like you should.
Click to expand...

Cool. You mind if I feel your wife/girlfriend up like that, without probable cause?
 
Kandahar said:
And what makes you think that dedicated terrorists won't be able to figure out some new creative way to sneak stuff onto an airplane? Screening for what the LAST guy used is pointless, because it has no relationship with what the NEXT guy will use.
Click to expand...

Until we train TSA workers to think like terrorists trying to smuggle a bomb on a plane or predict the future, it is what it is.
 
On I side note sometimes when I fall asleep waiting for a plain, I have my phone on my lap, I move around and it rolls off. Being in a haze I often just "grope" around for it.

And my co-worker is even worse, she is always groping around in her purse looking for her cell phone when sometimes she already has it out.

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom