What should you be subjected to in order to fly on airplane?

AGENT J · Dec 19, 2010

Travelsonic said:
Oh the irony. :roll:

LMAO
no drama and victim whining here
seems the constitution isnt the only thing you don't understand
you also dont understand the word irony:lamo

BmanMcfly · Dec 19, 2010

Centrist77 said:
because people and their dramatize, victim ways who dont understand the constitution nor reality.

Look the lawsuits are already in the process... but what won't you accept??

You CHOOSE :
- To go to the mall, so it's constitutional to have such invasive searches
- To walk the street, so we should have searches as you leave your door
- to use public transportation, so we should have to have our genitals groped to get on the bus
- To speak, so you should have to be publicly humiliated before being allowed to speak.
- To get married, so it's constitutional that a representative of the state have the 'right of the first night'

WHERE IS THE END?!?!

What will you NOT put up with???

It's ok, Comrade, I'm sure we'll end up with the type of freedom you seem to desire. Even if that type of 'freedom' often ends up with people being; stripped, murdered and buried in mass graves; worked and / or starved to death by the millions; Or simply round up and killed on the streets.

So I guess, It's our 'choice' to live in this society, so it's constitutional to be rounded up with millions and eventually murdered.

AGENT J · Dec 19, 2010

BmanMcfly said:
Look the lawsuits are already in the process... but what won't you accept??

You CHOOSE :
- To go to the mall, so it's constitutional to have such invasive searches
- To walk the street, so we should have searches as you leave your door
- to use public transportation, so we should have to have our genitals groped to get on the bus
- To speak, so you should have to be publicly humiliated before being allowed to speak.
- To get married, so it's constitutional that a representative of the state have the 'right of the first night'

WHERE IS THE END?!?!

What will you NOT put up with???

It's ok, Comrade, I'm sure we'll end up with the type of freedom you seem to desire. Even if that type of 'freedom' often ends up with people being; stripped, murdered and buried in mass graves; worked and / or starved to death by the millions; Or simply round up and killed on the streets.

So I guess, It's our 'choice' to live in this society, so it's constitutional to be rounded up with millions and eventually murdered.

LMAO!!!!!
what on gods green earth are you talking about?
are you always this dramatic?

did you honestly just equate the security at the airport that protects us all to:
"To speak, so you should have to be publicly humiliated before being allowed to speak."
"It's our 'choice' to live in this society, so it's constitutional to be rounded up with millions and eventually murdered"

talk about making absolutely no sense what so ever

WTH?????????:laughat:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAOxY_nHdew

BmanMcfly · Dec 19, 2010

Centrist77 said:
because people and their dramatize, victim ways who dont understand the constitution nor reality.

Centrist77 said:
LMAO!!!!!
what on gods green earth are you talking about?
are you always this dramatic?

did you honestly just equate the security at the airport that protects us all to:
"To speak, so you should have to be publicly humiliated before being allowed to speak."
"It's our 'choice' to live in this society, so it's constitutional to be rounded up with millions and eventually murdered"

talk about making absolutely no sense what so ever

WTH?????????:laughat:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAOxY_nHdew

Look, this 'security' is expanding... so I'm asking you how far does security have to go before you say 'no that's gone too far'???

Or would you accept all these things because, by your logic the constitution can be twisted into irrelevance so... I'm saying hypothetically how much is too much. I don't care how LIKELY that is to happen, only if you would put up with it if it happened.

BTW, if you still haven't caught yourself up on what the TSA has ACTUALLY been doing so far, then I would also point out that you are arguing from a position of ignorance of the actual subject at hand.

AGENT J · Dec 19, 2010

BmanMcfly said:
Look, this 'security' is expanding... so I'm asking you how far does security have to go before you say 'no that's gone too far'???

Or would you accept all these things because, by your logic the constitution can be twisted into irrelevance so... I'm saying hypothetically how much is too much. I don't care how LIKELY that is to happen, only if you would put up with it if it happened.

at the airport almost nothing if it involves SEARCHING because no matter whether you choose to accept it or not you DO surrender you rights of search, you are VOLUNTARILY getting searched UNLESS you give them a reason to search you further then that opens you up to suspicion then your screwed.

Fact is when you choose to fly you KNOW you are going to be searched and thats that, you dont want searched you dont fly

now with that being said, I understand that people may not like it, and thats fine, they are free to argue it or fight it but as soon as the constitution gets mentioned they lose the argument, No rights are being violated IN GENERAL. Could a TSA "abuse" his job? OF COURSE just like doctors do, teacher, coaches, police officers, prison guards, dentist etc etc etc

that happens but SO WHAT you punish the people that abuse it you dont judge the whole flock, like you dont say ALL priest molest kids? lol

so to reflect back when it comes to security on planes just about nothing that involves searches bother me, now could they be more PC or have more training? of course but again thats what needs improved not falsely crying about the constitution or trying to throw it all out.

I fly for my job pretty often late and early in the year and I am fine with what they do, though I do admit I havent flown since early November I think?

I have asked you to tell me how this violates the constitution and you cant do it,you let me know when you can and please dont give me the meaningless examples about if "a person" fondles someones privates you go to jail for assault or if a person looks at nude children thats kiddy porn laws because those types of examples are utter nonsense that have absolutely no logical bearing on the subject at hand.

BmanMcfly said:
BTW, if you still haven't caught yourself up on what the TSA has ACTUALLY been doing so far, then I would also point out that you are arguing from a position of ignorance of the actual subject at hand.

thanks for the up date but I have probably through it and have read what they do so Im cool unless you got some "special"info

the cases about poor training or someone abusing their jobs or somebody doing their jobs poorly dont concern me because those need addressed for what they are, idiots in the world that sometimes dont do thier jobs properly or abuse it, NOTHING MORE again just like doctors, teachers, priests, coaches etc etc etc

bottom line
if you dont LIKE it, thats fine
if you want it changed, thats fine
if you think its inappropriate, thats fine

but like some people have said here, its not sexual assault, its not kiddy porn, its not against the constitution and flying is not a right

no offense but you seem young with this stance and the way you apply emotion and fiction to reality, are you? honestly

jamesrage · Dec 19, 2010

Centrist77 said:
Fact is when you choose to fly you KNOW you are going to be searched and thats that, you dont want searched you dont fly

You don't have to leave your house, drive a car or go into a store. Does this justify you forking over your fourth amendment rights? There is no "applies only on the inside of your home" clause written in the 4th amendment.

AGENT J · Dec 19, 2010

jamesrage said:
You don't have to leave your house, drive a car or go into a store. Does this justify you forking over your fourth amendment rights? There is no "applies only on the inside of your home" clause written in the 4th amendment.

you are correct there is no "applies to the inside of you home" clause in the 4th amendment
whats that have to do with our discussion?
oh thats right absolutely nothing LMAO

but lets play the illogical game for a second since fantasy and reality is very fuzzy for you

leaving your house, thats your freedom and you are just going out into open land

driving YOUR OWN car, it yours, you are free to do so with out search. this right could very well be taken from you if you would like to drive it on somebody elses property or into a country or SECURE facility yes your car could be search, no search = no access

going into a store, yes absolutely, they could submit you to a search, now people dont but if they wanted to they most certainly could or they could simply not let you in, no search = no entry

this stuff is so dumb and common sense Im not even sure if you are being serious?

either way no mater how dumb and meaningless your examples are to the debate at hand none of these would violate your rights, you would choose the search or not gain access

BmanMcfly · Dec 19, 2010

Centrist77 said:
at the airport almost nothing if it involves SEARCHING because no matter whether you choose to accept it or not you DO surrender you rights of search, you are VOLUNTARILY getting searched UNLESS you give them a reason to search you further then that opens you up to suspicion then your screwed.

Ya, things like having big boobs is a real cause for 'suspicion to search'...

Fact is when you choose to fly you KNOW you are going to be searched and thats that, you dont want searched you dont fly

Yes... REASONABLE SEARCH!!!! And your ignorance of the topic is making light of the fact that what is being done is NO LONGER REASONABLE. THE TSA IS CROSSING THE LINE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADZUQUfJoBk
(For example)

now with that being said, I understand that people may not like it, and thats fine, they are free to argue it or fight it but as soon as the constitution gets mentioned they lose the argument, No rights are being violated IN GENERAL. Could a TSA "abuse" his job? OF COURSE just like doctors do, teacher, coaches, police officers, prison guards, dentist etc etc etc

But according to you just a few posts back they are doing "nothing wrong" and people are "dramatacizing"...

These people ARE ABUSING THEIR JOBS THAT"S THE FRIGGIN POINT!!
Why are you defending this action?? I hope you maintain your ignorance of what's going on, because you could spend two hours OF NOTHING BUT WOMEN AND CHILDREN being grabbed, felt up, molested, sexually assaulted all "in the name of security"... so what will you NOT put up with???

I'll get banned if I put that picture up again, but stripping people and lining them up to be shot could be framed as "for security" so how much will you put up with???

that happens but SO WHAT you punish the people that abuse it you dont judge the whole flock, like you dont say ALL priest molest kids? lol

HOW THE F(*&Y$ can you laugh about this???

Dude, this is an act of humiliation... it's an act of dominance, and it doesn't make anybody ANY SAFER especially when the pentagon's Anwar Al-Awlaki just gets his bombers past security whenever it's about to expand another level. If you put up with it then you'll put up with it and justify it when it expands, that's why I keep asking what will you put up with??

so to reflect back when it comes to security on planes just about nothing that involves searches bother me, now could they be more PC or have more training? of course but again thats what needs improved not falsely crying about the constitution or trying to throw it all out.

Yes, throw THE WHOLE SYSTEM OUT. We have a system that worked fine before Chertoff ran the company the made the machines, got into politics to get TSA to buy thousands of the machines, ended his political career to return to his job as the CEO of the same company... it's proven itself rife with abuse that is FAR above and beyond the damage caused by any terrorist attack. To allow it to continue is a slap in the face to americans everywhere and the concept of living in a free country.

That you're too easy to twist the constitution in acceptance and denials of this behavior is a statement in itself that I won't verbalize.

I fly for my job pretty often late and early in the year and I am fine with what they do, though I do admit I havent flown since early November I think?

I have asked you to tell me how this violates the constitution and you cant do it,

Yes, it goes beyond any REASONABLE search, it violates your PERSON. The fact that there has yet to be judgement on this issue is the only fact keeping it in the realm of a grey area.

you let me know when you can and please dont give me the meaningless examples about if "a person" fondles someones privates you go to jail for assault

Over the clothes is an arrestable misdemeanor and under the clothes is a sexual assault... Yes. Just because they got a fake badge doesn't make them above the law. The ONLY example you could provide that would show any different is for a person who is UNDER ARREST ALREADY... so, if we must be treated as prisoners to fly, why don't we just treat everyone like prisoners everywhere??? Have lockdowns, curfews and all the other fun "constitutional" and freedom loving stuff that comes with security of this nature.

or if a person looks at nude children thats kiddy porn laws because those types of examples are utter nonsense that have absolutely no logical bearing on the subject at hand.

You forget the fact that there are LAWS against photographing children naked. It's called child pornography... but I see you approve of that as well by your statements...and allowing certain segments of the population engaging in that type of abuse of children.

Are you really on the side you think you're on??

thanks for the up date but I have probably through it and have read what they do so Im cool unless you got some "special"info

the cases about poor training or someone abusing their jobs or somebody doing their jobs poorly dont concern me because those need addressed for what they are, idiots in the world that sometimes dont do thier jobs properly or abuse it, NOTHING MORE again just like doctors, teachers, priests, coaches etc etc etc

What do they do to doctors, teachers, priests and coaches that do :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leJToxqK4Dc
to children??? Oh, but that's ok, that child was probably a terrorist, right??

bottom line
if you dont LIKE it, thats fine
if you want it changed, thats fine
if you think its inappropriate, thats fine

but like some people have said here, its not sexual assault, its not kiddy porn, its not against the constitution and flying is not a right

no offense but you seem young with this stance and the way you apply emotion and fiction to reality, are you? honestly

No offense, but you clearly don't understand what the significance is of security / police encroachment on people's lives are... you clearly don't understand what happens when security goes overboard, and you clearly don't understand what it means to live in a free country, especially being so willing to pass up that freedom in the name of security.

jamesrage · Dec 20, 2010

Centrist77 said:
you are correct there is no "applies to the inside of you home" clause in the 4th amendment
whats that have to do with our discussion?
oh thats right absolutely nothing LMAO

I guess you just love pretending to be stupid just to justify flushing the 4th amendment down the toilet because you choose to go the airport.

but lets play the illogical game for a second since fantasy and reality is very fuzzy for you

Nothing illogical about it. Terrorists have used cars, bicycles, trucks, buses and trains to blow up people and you do not have to do any of those things. If the government can mandate that you be subjected to a strip search or invasive pat down with out being arrested then they can mandate those things before you step on a bus,cab or a train or that the police can just randomly pull people over and strip search them.

leaving your house, thats your freedom and you are just going out into open land

Again that's your choice to leave the house and step onto public sidewalks and streets just like its your choice to use a airplane.

driving YOUR OWN car, it yours, you are free to do so with out search.

Driving a privilege.And besides that if you support the government strip searching you just to ride on a plane then why not your own car? After all it has to use public streets and you could walk. they got mobile x-ray machines that can drive right up next you to see if you are transporting anything you shouldn't

this right could very well be taken from you if you would like to drive it on somebody elses property or into a country or SECURE facility yes your car could be search, no search = no access

going into a store, yes absolutely, they could submit you to a search, now people dont but if they wanted to they most certainly could or they could simply not let you in, no search = no entry

this stuff is so dumb and common sense Im not even sure if you are being serious?

either way no mater how dumb and meaningless your examples are to the debate at hand none of these would violate your rights, you would choose the search or not gain access

What is dumb is that you support your 4th amendment rights to be blatantly violated in exchange for flying on a plane and somehow pretend that its different everywhere else.

AGENT J · Dec 20, 2010

BmanMcfly said:
Ya, things like having big boobs is a real cause for 'suspicion to search'...

strawman LMAO and irrelevant like I said address the real issue dont abondon logic LMAO

BmanMcfly said:
Yes... REASONABLE SEARCH!!!! And your ignorance of the topic is making light of the fact that what is being done is NO LONGER REASONABLE. THE TSA IS CROSSING THE LINE.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADZUQUfJoBk

reasonable search or what ever search they want to do for you to participate in using their product/service LMAO

no ignorance here only common sense, reality and no use of over dramatics lol

and your link is meaningless because it isnt addressing the issue, if it gets abused and agents abuse it then more training is needed, so be it, but that would be the issues nothing else

I could post 100 links of dentist, polices, doctors teachers etc abusing their jobs or doing poor jobs or conducting themselves improperly does that mean all teachers doctors etc are violating rights and we should get ride of them? of course not because thats DUMB

how many people go through airports a day? 1.5 million in the us? are all 1.5 million getting a bad TSA agent and all getting abused? of course not, your emotion and anger are directed at the wrong thing, use logic and address the problems instead of making stuff up

BmanMcfly said:
But according to you just a few posts back they are doing "nothing wrong" and people are "dramatacizing"...

LMAO I only said that if you take it out of content I clearly said there will always be bad employees and people that abuse their jobs, and THATS the issue not the Constitution or what TSA policies are LMAO

BmanMcfly said:
These people ARE ABUSING THEIR JOBS THAT"S THE FRIGGIN POINT!!
Why are you defending this action?? I hope you maintain your ignorance of what's going on, because you could spend two hours OF NOTHING BUT WOMEN AND CHILDREN being grabbed, felt up, molested, sexually assaulted all "in the name of security"... so what will you NOT put up with???

LMAO whaaaaaaaaa
I already said there will be people who abuse there jobs LMAO grow up, there are no procedures that force you to get "molested and sexually assaulted" LMAO :lamo

address the issue, more training, firing of certain agents for misconduct etc etc
try to use common sense and leave your emotion on our pillow

also NOBODY here is defending people abusing their jobs, thats just you being dramatic again to make yourself feel good about your stance, try to stick to truths

BmanMcfly said:
HOW THE F(*&Y$ can you laugh about this???

easy because Im laughing at you and how you arent able to control your emotions and separate them from logic which gives you a grossly twisted perception of reality, its funny

BmanMcfly said:
Dude, this is an act of humiliation... it's an act of dominance, and it doesn't make anybody ANY SAFER especially when the pentagon's Anwar Al-Awlaki just gets his bombers past security whenever it's about to expand another level. If you put up with it then you'll put up with it and justify it when it expands, that's why I keep asking what will you put up with??

nothing more than your dramatic opinion
its not humiliation to all 1.5 million flyers a day, if theres bad agents they need addressed, pretty simple logic

get rid of all priests I heard one molested a kid

kill all Muslims they are all terrorists!

one time a doctor touched a women while she was under anesthesia, GET RID OF ALL DOCTORS!

I heard of a gynecologist that just went into the field to look at and touch vaginas, all gynecologist must be EVIL!!!! LMAO

get real, again GROW UP!!!!
like I said if you dont like the system fine, try to get it changed but argue with COMMON SENSE because sexual assault, molestation and the constitution wont get it done to get rid of it all, those only address specific cases if they exist.

BmanMcfly said:
Yes, throw THE WHOLE SYSTEM OUT. We have a system that worked fine before Chertoff ran the company the made the machines, got into politics to get TSA to buy thousands of the machines, ended his political career to return to his job as the CEO of the same company... it's proven itself rife with abuse that is FAR above and beyond the damage caused by any terrorist attack. To allow it to continue is a slap in the face to americans everywhere and the concept of living in a free country.

wow I can almost feel you punching your keyboard
nooooooooo, no dramitics here at all :laughat:

BmanMcfly said:
That you're too easy to twist the constitution in acceptance and denials of this behavior is a statement in itself that I won't verbalize.

again FACT remains their policies do not violate the constitution period LMAO
you can keep saying it does over and over again but the facts wont change

BmanMcfly said:
Yes, it goes beyond any REASONABLE search, it violates your PERSON. The fact that there has yet to be judgement on this issue is the only fact keeping it in the realm of a grey area.

good luck with that, any judge smarter than a 2nd grader will not say the policy violates rights

could a judge find bad TSA agents? absolutely but it will be their conduct not the policies LMAO

reality, learn to live in it instead of the sky is failing mentality:scared: LMAO

BmanMcfly said:
Over the clothes is an arrestable misdemeanor and under the clothes is a sexual assault... Yes. Just because they got a fake badge doesn't make them above the law. The ONLY example you could provide that would show any different is for a person who is UNDER ARREST ALREADY... so, if we must be treated as prisoners to fly, why don't we just treat everyone like prisoners everywhere??? Have lockdowns, curfews and all the other fun "constitutional" and freedom loving stuff that comes with security of this nature.

will you quite saying this because it DOES NOT APPLY genius LMAO
say it again, guess what it will still be meaningless and hold no bearing

BmanMcfly said:
You forget the fact that there are LAWS against photographing children naked. It's called child pornography... but I see you approve of that as well by your statements...and allowing certain segments of the population engaging in that type of abuse of children.

you forget you live in a fantasy world, my niece had surgery the filmed it and took stills? whole cow Im going to sue the hospital!!!!!!! they are nothing but kiddie porn pushers!!!!! you HAVE to be under 21 if not you are a scary person

BmanMcfly said:
Are you really on the side you think you're on??

yes common sense reality and facts side not the sky is falling kiddy porn side LMAO

BmanMcfly said:
What do they do to doctors, teachers, priests and coaches that do :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leJToxqK4Dc
to children??? Oh, but that's ok, that child was probably a terrorist, right??

oh know a little girl cried because her teddy bear got taken and then her mom couldnt control her so she was having a temper tantrum (i see how you can relate)
and then you jump on the molestation train hahahahahahahahahahaha WOW

what I like about you video is that it actually supports ME because they talk about the POLICIES MORE TRAINING and that the girl got searched because the metal went off twice and EVERYONE get searched when that happens, they also proceeded to say how you can STOP that from happening, but Im sure you emotion didnt let you hear and of the REALITY all you saw was kiddy pron and molestation

oh and to answer your question
absolutely nothing Y you may ask, because the PARENT was right there and anything that was being done was a choice made by the parent

also ESPECIALLY for doctors this happens all the time, kids dont want touched but have to get touched anywhere and everywhere LMAO

like I said R-E-A-L-I-T-Y

BmanMcfly said:
No offense, but you clearly don't understand what the significance is of security / police encroachment on people's lives are... you clearly don't understand what happens when security goes overboard, and you clearly don't understand what it means to live in a free country, especially being so willing to pass up that freedom in the name of security.

no offense taking because you dont know what you are talking about, your dramatics have no bearing on the reality of the situation LMAO

read this very slowly
lose your out of control emotion and think about things LOGICALLY and what is really happening in REALITY because every time you say kiddy porn and molestation in BLANKET statements I laugh harder and harder at you.

AGENT J · Dec 20, 2010

jamesrage said:
I guess you just love pretending to be stupid just to justify flushing the 4th amendment down the toilet because you choose to go the airport.

nope I choose to live in reality and not fantasy dram land

jamesrage said:
Nothing illogical about it. Terrorists have used cars, bicycles, trucks, buses and trains to blow up people and you do not have to do any of those things. If the government can mandate that you be subjected to a strip search or invasive pat down with out being arrested then they can mandate those things before you step on a bus,cab or a train or that the police can just randomly pull people over and strip search them.

LMAO wow this is dumb
lets do one at a time
just driving a car? no, driving it on to private property or an airport or secured facility YES THEY CAN
bike? see above
truck? see above
buses? your bus? see above somebody else bus? yes you could be searched to even board it
train? see buses

jamesrage said:
Again that's your choice to leave the house and step onto public sidewalks and streets just like its your choice to use a airplane.

one is a SERVICE you are choosing to partake in LMAO
the others <big dramatic pause> is not :doh

jamesrage said:
Driving a privilege.And besides that if you support the government strip searching you just to ride on a plane then why not your own car? After all it has to use public streets and you could walk. they got mobile x-ray machines that can drive right up next you to see if you are transporting anything you shouldn't

see the bolded word above for you answer
YOUR CAR

but once said car goes to certain areas again it can be searched

jamesrage said:
What is dumb is that you support your 4th amendment rights to be blatantly violated in exchange for flying on a plane and somehow pretend that its different everywhere else.

only problem with your statement above there is no blatant violation LMAO nor do I act like its different "everywhere else"

more dramatics and making stuff up, please argued FACTS and stuff that is actually said

again I choose to live in reality and not fantasy dream land

:doh

like shooting fish in a barrel

BmanMcfly · Dec 20, 2010

Centrist77 said:
strawman LMAO and irrelevant like I said address the real issue dont abondon logic LMAO

reasonable search or what ever search they want to do for you to participate in using their product/service LMAO
....LMAO

read this very slowly
lose your out of control emotion and think about things LOGICALLY and what is really happening in REALITY because every time you say kiddy porn and molestation in BLANKET statements I laugh harder and harder at you.

Ok... so all you'll tell me is "it's not bad enough yet, the terrorists still scare me too much to speak out" or some variation to that same effect... fine.

Where will you draw the line? Honestly. What could government do where you'd think to yourself, "This goes too far!"?

But no, I live in the real world. I live in a world where you are more likely to die of a bee sting or a car wreck then a terrorist act, so the security is really only security theater it only protects you so much... if someone was crazy enough they would go on a suicide rampage... or strap a bomb to their chest, do you think they are just going to be stopped by dosing everyone with radiation????

No, steps can be taken to prevent attacks that don't involve humiliating people at random, like I said, if you did nothing but watch TSA abuse videos there'd be more and more added to keep you going for a long time... every time I go back there's more people speaking out, more news clips, more old ladies being scorned for having diabetic paraphernalia, more children being nothing short of molested publicly, people having colostomy bags, urology bags torn out and forced to clean up the mess made... and I'm not joking.

I am actually shocked that you're capable to laugh at what is going on in the name of security... you don't understand that this is GOING to expand, everytime a terrorist tries to blow up his underwear, or his boots, the security is going to move... all it would take is some terrorist strapping a bomb to their chest and going to a mall and you'd be using your "constitutional understanding" to justify putting TSA procedures at the mall near you... you'd BEG for it... "keep me safe" you'd say.

It makes me sad to watch the US die like this.

AGENT J · Dec 20, 2010

BmanMcfly said:
Ok... so all you'll tell me is "it's not bad enough yet, the terrorists still scare me too much to speak out" or some variation to that same effect... fine.

what the hell are you talking about? LMAO
:whothere: hellooooo MCFLy?

whwer do you get this stuff???

BmanMcfly said:
Where will you draw the line? Honestly. What could government do where you'd think to yourself, "This goes too far!"?

well you have to be more specific than that, my point is that those policies doo not violate the constitution.

if you are asking me what goes to far personally? I dont know, youd have to give me examples to judge

but for the most part if its a service im choosing to partake in, well who ever is providing the service can pretty much do what they want, if its logical

BmanMcfly said:
But no, I live in the real world. I live in a world where you are more likely to die of a bee sting or a car wreck then a terrorist act, so the security is really only security theater it only protects you so much... if someone was crazy enough they would go on a suicide rampage... or strap a bomb to their chest, do you think they are just going to be stopped by dosing everyone with radiation????

straw man no barring on the argument
I have already said a bunch of times but it seem comprehension isnt strong with you that if you dont like it thats fine, if you think its wrong or a waste, thats fine too

try to change it argue those points because I HAVE NOT, what I have said is that the policies do not violate the constitution and I stand by that fact, lol stay focused

BmanMcfly said:
No, steps can be taken to prevent attacks that don't involve humiliating people at random, like I said, if you did nothing but watch TSA abuse videos there'd be more and more added to keep you going for a long time... every time I go back there's more people speaking out, more news clips, more old ladies being scorned for having diabetic paraphernalia, more children being nothing short of molested publicly, people having colostomy bags, urology bags torn out and forced to clean up the mess made... and I'm not joking.

your opinion, the one video clearly wasnt abuse at all and again thats not the issue

also of course better steps can be made thats just silly

BmanMcfly said:
I am actually shocked that you're capable to laugh at what is going on in the name of security... you don't understand that this is GOING to expand, everytime a terrorist tries to blow up his underwear, or his boots, the security is going to move... all it would take is some terrorist strapping a bomb to their chest and going to a mall and you'd be using your "constitutional understanding" to justify putting TSA procedures at the mall near you... you'd BEG for it... "keep me safe" you'd say.

again read it slowly, im laughing at YOU and your fantasy world
oh its going to expand huh? really, thats some FACT you just laid out there lmao

also if they do expand we'll cross that bridge when it comes

and as for the mall if they want metal detectors and what not thats fine, if it bothers me I can not shop there, or nobody can shop there and then they will have to change their policies, get it? LMAO but I wont beg for it, I could careless genius, another false ASSumption by you. They could go back to metal detectors only if they want :shrug:
but I can say this, it STILL will NOT violate the constitution lol

you jump all around it makes no sense, the debate with me is the constitution and how the policy does NOT violate it, which is a fact

BmanMcfly said:
It makes me sad to watch the US die like this.

get a tissue because the US isnt dying because of TSA procedure LMAO:laughat:
:scared:

Travelsonic · Dec 20, 2010

Centrist77 said:
get a tissue because the US isnt dying because of TSA procedure LMAO:laughat:
:scared:

No, it is dying because of cluelessnes like this.

/zing

American · Dec 20, 2010

Whovian said:
I disagree. It's obviously worth reporting it, as it's making such a big stink. I'm just looking to see whether or not the stink is really warranted, based on the actual percentage of invasive pat-downs that generate a negative report from air travelers. I have no idea what percentage I'd find acceptable... I'd just like to see the numbers first.

Even though you disagree, I appreciate the thanks.

AGENT J · Dec 20, 2010

Travelsonic said:
No, it is dying because of cluelessnes like this.

/zing

did you just say zing to something that wasnt even a zing? LMAO
well you just confirmed your age

probablem is ive showned and defended my point of view while nobody else has offfered anything but crazy, irrelvant the sky is falling examples. You let me know when you can do the same. lol

BmanMcfly · Dec 20, 2010

Centrist77 said:
what the hell are you talking about? LMAO
:whothere: hellooooo MCFLy?

whwer do you get this stuff???

Well, your apparent willingness to remain ignorant on a subject, the delusion of how you maintain this sense of smug superiority like you decide reality, and your willingness to justify these types of actions as though it 'makes people safer'.

All I hear is "I'm too much of a coward to actually look into the problem, so I'll just laugh and pretend like it's not real."

well you have to be more specific than that, my point is that those policies doo not violate the constitution.

Ok, so, again, using your logic of how laws work : It is a CHOICE to send your kids to public school, so to keep them safe we should have them all strip naked and have their pictures taken. That wouldn't violate the constitution because it's your CHOICE.

Eventually, I might get it to click with you that there are IMPLICATIONS to what you are actually suggesting.

if you are asking me what goes to far personally? I dont know, youd have to give me examples to judge

I gave you like 50 examples and the best I got from you was laughter and jokes and how there's no way to violate the constitution or a persons rights.

but for the most part if its a service im choosing to partake in, well who ever is providing the service can pretty much do what they want, if its logical

straw man no barring on the argument
I have already said a bunch of times but it seem comprehension isnt strong with you that if you dont like it thats fine, if you think its wrong or a waste, thats fine too

try to change it argue those points because I HAVE NOT, what I have said is that the policies do not violate the constitution and I stand by that fact, lol stay focused

No, YOU are the one lacking comprehension... YOU are stating these things are not violations of the constitution, SO, I'm pointing out to you how this logic plays out in the real world. Our system of laws are based on precedence... and your idea of 'precedence' is that offering a choice allows for the legitimization of criminality.

It's not my fault you're choosing to debate a topic where you are choosing to remain ignorant as to what is at hand and what the implications are of your suggestions.

your opinion, the one video clearly wasnt abuse at all and again thats not the issue

also of course better steps can be made thats just silly

*self-censoring to prevent banishment*

again read it slowly, im laughing at YOU and your fantasy world
oh its going to expand huh? really, thats some FACT you just laid out there lmao

also if they do expand we'll cross that bridge when it comes

Ya... HAHAHA CHILDREN getting molested is fun... hahaha women getting groped publicly is funny... hahaha

Grow up man... this is the real world. In the REAL WORLD, around the world in just the past 100 years there have been nearly a DOZEN leaders that stepped up to prominence who then continued to install similar systems of control like the TSA is being ordered into setting precedence to allow here... these systems have conservatively caused the deaths of 150 million people in that time... and that is NOT counting Hitler.

and as for the mall if they want metal detectors and what not thats fine, if it bothers me I can not shop there, or nobody can shop there and then they will have to change their policies, get it? LMAO but I wont beg for it, I could careless genius, another false ASSumption by you. They could go back to metal detectors only if they want :shrug:
but I can say this, it STILL will NOT violate the constitution lol

you jump all around it makes no sense, the debate with me is the constitution and how the policy does NOT violate it, which is a fact

I know you have a hard time following trains of thought and that there are IMPLICATIONS that go beyond events that happen today.... You can drop a penny off a building and make the statement that gravity will make it fall, it takes another step to point out the implication that dropping pennies of buildings WILL eventually hit and kill someone.

get a tissue because the US isnt dying because of TSA procedure LMAO:laughat:
:scared:

No, not 'because' of TSA procedure... but because people are actually helping to keep this going, which in turn helps it to expand, which leads to the next step... but you're not looking at this past the tip of your nose...

You have no concept of what it means to live in a free country, and you are helping to end this countries status as a free country.

Anyway... I'm done... remembering what my dad once told me, "never argue with a fool, he'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience."

AGENT J · Dec 20, 2010

BmanMcfly said:
Well, your apparent willingness to remain ignorant on a subject, the delusion of how you maintain this sense of smug superiority like you decide reality, and your willingness to justify these types of actions as though it 'makes people safer'.

LMAO this is so much fun there you go making stuff up again
1.) Ive backed up my arguments you have not
2.) "I" dont decide reality FACTS do and they are on my side about the constitution
3.) "i" also dont justify per say I just know they dont violate the constitution, thats my only argument
4.) I have never stated the opinion it makes us safer, I have only stated thats what they are trying to do

please keep up and debate my actual point, you can make up anything you want but ill just call you on it like every other time LMAO

BmanMcfly said:
All I hear is "I'm too much of a coward to actually look into the problem, so I'll just laugh and pretend like it's not real."

of course YOU hear that because of your bias and poor preception of reality and like of understanding the constitution

also you are lying yet again, in many thread i said there CAN be problems but it wont be the policies it wil be bad agents and that needs fixed, guess you just chose to ignore that because, well, then you make up that im a coward to try and make yourself feel right lol

BmanMcfly said:
Ok, so, again, using your logic of how laws work : It is a CHOICE to send your kids to public school, so to keep them safe we should have them all strip naked and have their pictures taken. That wouldn't violate the constitution because it's your CHOICE.

Eventually, I might get it to click with you that there are IMPLICATIONS to what you are actually suggesting.

now thats not MY logic, thats the logic you are trying to make up for me and have failed in just about every made up attempt.

compared to me wanting to partake in a service which the airport provides and the airport having security policies is NOTHING like your example of a PUBLIC SCHOOL, taking naked pictures LMAO

yes you are definitely a kid

eventually it might click with you that what im saying about the airport and constitution and the silliness meaningless examples you make up have no bearing on anything

BmanMcfly said:
I gave you like 50 examples and the best I got from you was laughter and jokes and how there's no way to violate the constitution or a persons rights.

more lies, 50 examples? "theres NO way to violate the constitution or a persons rights" LMAO

again you definitely have to be a kid to think this is what you read

BmanMcfly said:
No, YOU are the one lacking comprehension... YOU are stating these things are not violations of the constitution, SO, I'm pointing out to you how this logic plays out in the real world. Our system of laws are based on precedence... and your idea of 'precedence' is that offering a choice allows for the legitimization of criminality.

wrong again kid, you are not comprehending what my argument is, the TSA policies do not violate the constitution and thats a fact, period

also you havent pointed out my logic at all, you make up your own that is NOT equal in the least bit lmao, its ok, its not your fault you dont know what you dont know

BmanMcfly said:
It's not my fault you're choosing to debate a topic where you are choosing to remain ignorant as to what is at hand and what the implications are of your suggestions.

no ignorance here at, i know reality and its real life not the sky is falling mentality

also they arent my suggestions, they are facts, HUGE difference

BmanMcfly said:
*self-censoring to prevent banishment*

translation: you have no answer

BmanMcfly said:
Ya... HAHAHA CHILDREN getting molested is fun... hahaha women getting groped publicly is funny... hahaha

who said it was? oh thats right nobody LMAO

BmanMcfly said:
Grow up man... this is the real world. In the REAL WORLD, around the world in just the past 100 years there have been nearly a DOZEN leaders that stepped up to prominence who then continued to install similar systems of control like the TSA is being ordered into setting precedence to allow here... these systems have conservatively caused the deaths of 150 million people in that time... and that is NOT counting Hitler.

LMAO did you honestly tell me to grow up and earlier you said i dont know reality or cant comprehend? are you just going to repeat everything I said to you and try to make it your own? LMAO whats next? "i know you are but what am I?" hahahahahah

TSA = hitler and 150 million deaths :scared:
HAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

kid listen seriously I think you need a higher does or Zoloft. I cant fathom this much doom and gloom being in a balanced logical persons life? what drives this sky is falling mentality?

BmanMcfly said:
I know you have a hard time following trains of thought and that there are IMPLICATIONS that go beyond events that happen today.... You can drop a penny off a building and make the statement that gravity will make it fall, it takes another step to point out the implication that dropping pennies of buildings WILL eventually hit and kill someone.

wow, Aristotle you amaze me

by the way kid, pennys dropped off buildings will NOT kill you, terminal velocity for that much weight and the impact isnt great enough unless in some weird freak case you have an already damaged skull (id wear a helmet if I was you)

WELCOME TO REALITY :lamo

BmanMcfly said:
No, not 'because' of TSA procedure... but because people are actually helping to keep this going, which in turn helps it to expand, which leads to the next step... but you're not looking at this past the tip of your nose...

really says you and your panic opinion BUT for sake of MY argument, you know what we are actually talking about and not some STRAWMAN

say this would be true, this will domino in to Russia LMAO how does that change the fact that TSA policy does NOT violate the constitution??? oh thats right IT DOESNT LMAO

BmanMcfly said:
You have no concept of what it means to live in a free country, and you are helping to end this countries status as a free country.

really? man I thought I lived in it every day and you were the one that said stuff violated the constitution BUT in fact it didnt???? hmmmm you really got me there

hmmm lets see, since TSA was started what "freedoms" did I lose????
hmmmmmm thinking . . . . . . . thinking
oh again thats right NONE :2funny:

BmanMcfly said:
Anyway... I'm done... remembering what my dad once told me, "never argue with a fool, he'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience."

did he tell while he was walking away and right after after you told him TSA policies violate the constitution? :beam: LMAO

well you were certainly beat with experience, thats for sure, now get off his computer and go out in the living room and ask him whos right, he'll tell you I am, TSA policy does not violate the constitution

make sure you did all your home work first though, wouldnt want him to know you were touching his computer before you did it and you get in trouble

Travelsonic · Dec 23, 2010

Flying in 2 days, opting out of the body scanners, and the others flying with me will be playing a tag-team watch-our-**** approach especially after the TSA screener who got arrested for stealing a laptop [and got probation]. If they refuse to let me opt out of the scanner for the pat down, which has happened to people before, I call a supervisor.

Seems like a sound plan.

And hey, Centrist, you keep repeatedly dismissing the constitutional issues - why not prove it instead of just repeating "It is because [I say so][it is]" type arguments.

AGENT J · Dec 24, 2010

Travelsonic said:
Flying in 2 days, opting out of the body scanners, and the others flying with me will be playing a tag-team watch-our-**** approach especially after the TSA screener who got arrested for stealing a laptop [and got probation]. If they refuse to let me opt out of the scanner for the pat down, which has happened to people before, I call a supervisor.

Seems like a sound plan.

And hey, Centrist, you keep repeatedly dismissing the constitutional issues - why not prove it instead of just repeating "It is because [I say so][it is]" type arguments.

I already have LMAO, its a FACT dude, you can ignore it if YOU want but the fact remains TSA policy does not in any way shape or form violate the constitution. To participate in the said service of flying you are subject to search and seizure, if you do not wish to be subject to search and seizure DO NOT FLY

this is just plan fact and COMMON SENSE, flying is not a right, therefore the TSA policy they have is your choice to go through or not.

Now with that said
you are fee to not LIKE it
you are free to CRY about it (obviously you know this already)
you are free to SPEAK out against it
you are free to not PARTAKE in said service
you are free to PROTEST to change it
and all of that is fine and dandy

you want to think its to much, over the top, overkill, non effective etc etc have at it hoss, thats fine with me I may even agree with you but what it absolutely is NOT is a violation of the constitution LMAO deny it all you want, dont care, people look stupid when they deny facts and thats their choice

God · Dec 25, 2010

Ahem.

Does anyone here know why Al Qaeda does not attack US as much as it attacks other nations? It is because they make money in the US. When America's economy is hurting so are they. The recent half assed terror attempts were just to prove they are still relevant. The US will not be under Al Qaeda's cross-hairs if we don't do anything to aggravate them in the first place.

When radical Muslims come to America, they love it. They love the freedom and the potential to earn money. They see the strippers and hookers and the ball drops for them and they are posed with an age old question. Why should I wait till I am dead to have 40 virgins when I can stay alive and have 40 whores right now.

As far as the aggressive security on the TSA's part, it is a waste of money. Well, that is to the tax payers, the rich guys who had politicians as friends who sold the machines got a sweet deal. The scanners in some cases can not pick up binary compound explosives and if someone had the intent to blow up a plane, taking his life and along with everyone aboard the said plane, storing the explosive in the anal cavity (As has been done by them in the past) will bypass scanners and pat downs.

Unfortunately, there is no such thing as an ultimate defense and what makes these security measures even more ridiculous is that an estimated 10% of travelers have to go through them. Meaning that 90% do not. I am not big on math or statistics but I am pretty sure the law of averages says that a would-be bomber would have a good chance of not even having to go through the enhanced security.

If someone actually decides to pack some Semtex in his anal cavity and gets on a plane, the next day Janet Napolitano (along with the TSA Admin.) are going to stress the need for anal cavity searches (for your protection mind you). Hanity expressed his outrage about these enhanced security measures yet when Bush was in power he supported the Patriot Act. I am assuming that he would be against water boarding if it were happening under the Obama Administration.

I wonder how many of you would be pro anal cavity search, probably quite a few depending on who the current President is of course.

Paschendale · Dec 30, 2010

Got gropped today... The dude was ALL up in my business. This stuff... it's exactly what the 4th amendment was written to prevent.

AGENT J · Dec 30, 2010

Paschendale said:
Got gropped today... The dude was ALL up in my business. This stuff... it's exactly what the 4th amendment was written to prevent.

actually it wasnt at all, you had the choice not to partake in their services but you chose to and knew that requires a search, the 4th amendment is still protecting you just like it alwasy has, there was aboslutley no violation of it at all

you may not like the TSA policies and I may very well agree but they dont violate the 4th in anyway what so ever.

Paschendale · Dec 30, 2010

Centrist77 said:
actually it wasnt at all, you had the choice not to partake in their services but you chose to and knew that requires a search, the 4th amendment is still protecting you just like it alwasy has, there was aboslutley no violation of it at all

you may not like the TSA policies and I may very well agree but they dont violate the 4th in anyway what so ever.

That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. That's like saying "Oh, it's optional to drink the water that comes out of your sink. You could go down to the river that's eight or nine or a hundred miles away, and clean up some water yourself." Just because something wasn't a necessary part of life in 1789 doesn't mean it isn't now. Instant and secure communication and speedy travel, these are a part of our lives. A postal service wasn't a part of life in 1500, but the founders recognized it as a newer addition to a culture that was invaluable. Unnecessarily burdening people is not the business of our government, and unreasonable searches (which is anything based simply on suspicion, without a warrant or probable cause) is against the 4th amendment. They can't do it. Even if you ask them to. They aren't allowed. Period.

AGENT J · Dec 30, 2010

Paschendale said:
That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. That's like saying "Oh, it's optional to drink the water that comes out of your sink. You could go down to the river that's eight or nine or a hundred miles away, and clean up some water yourself." Just because something wasn't a necessary part of life in 1789 doesn't mean it isn't now. Instant and secure communication and speedy travel, these are a part of our lives. A postal service wasn't a part of life in 1500, but the founders recognized it as a newer addition to a culture that was invaluable. Unnecessarily burdening people is not the business of our government, and unreasonable searches (which is anything based simply on suspicion, without a warrant or probable cause) is against the 4th amendment. They can't do it. Even if you ask them to. They aren't allowed. Period.

think what you want but its a fact! one you can argue till you are blue in the face but the fact is "TSA POLICY" does not violate the 4th by an stretch of the imagination

sorry you are flat out WRONG

i can open a business tonight, a club, and if I want to search you with TSA guidelines before you come in, I have absolutely every right to do so

the right you have is to NOT come to my club, nobody is FORCING you to come to my club, its really that simple, clubing is not a right

nobody is forcing you to commercially fly, flying is not a right, dont like the policies dont fly and fight to get them changed but dont say they violate the 4th because you'll be flat out WRONG lol

you CHOOSE to fly and you CHOOSE to be searched so there is no violation in reality
they are 100% allowed because you AGREE to it and their service, you are choosing to partake in thier service and their polices plain and simple LMAO

sorry you just dont understand the 4th

also I agree YOUR example was the dumbest thing ever, to bad it has NOTHING to do with what I said or reality

What should you be subjected to in order to fly on airplane?

What should you be subjected to in order to fly on airplane?

invasive pat downs

Non invasive pat downs.

Subjected to radiation so you and or your children can be virtually stripped searched.

Real strip searches

Cavity search.

walking through a metal detector.

other

"If you ain't first, you're last"

"If you ain't first, you're last"

"If you ain't first, you're last"

"If you ain't first, you're last"

"If you ain't first, you're last"

"If you ain't first, you're last"

"If you ain't first, you're last"

Trump Grump Whisperer

"If you ain't first, you're last"

"If you ain't first, you're last"

"If you ain't first, you're last"

New member

Uncanny

"If you ain't first, you're last"

Uncanny

"If you ain't first, you're last"