Posted on 11/23/2010 11:03:40 AM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Maybe it was the video of the three-year old getting molested, maybe it was the sexual assault victim having to cry her way through getting groped, maybe it was the father watching teenage TSA officers joke about his attractive daughter.
'Whatever it was, this issue didn’t sit right with me. We shouldn’t be required to do this simply to get into our own country.'
As a result, Mr Kernan informed staff he did not want to go through the infamous Backscatter imaging machine.
He was told he would have to undergo an invasive pat-down search, but again politely told staff that he would consider any contact with his genital areas as assault.
After being told that the two options were TSA policy, he replied: ' I disagree with the policy, and I think that it is unconstitutional.
'As a US citizen, I have the right to move freely within my country as long as I can demonstrate proof of citizenship and have demonstrated no reasonable cause to be detained.'
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
You do have a right to conduct business with a private interprise of which the airlines are.The gubmint is getting in the way like they do with everything in our lives.They have NO right to do this.
It was a 60’s or early 70’s case (the name escapes me) in which the SCOTUS struck down a NY requirement that you must be a resident of NY for at least 6 months before you were eligible for welfare. The rationale? Such a requirement burdened the constitutional right of the “poor” to travel.
"You see, it is official TSA policy that people (both citizens and non-citizens alike) from international flights are screened as they enter the airport, despite the fact that they have already flown."
Why are they doing this if you have ARRIVED and have ALREADY flown on the plane? Unless you are trying to make a connecting flight, what can they do if you refuse everything and just want to leave the airport?
Well, don’t count on them being consistent with that rationale. They’ll use the opposite rationale if necessary in the next case in order to further the power of the government.
The guy is mistaken on it being TSA policy. The problem is with the NKI layout. Arriving passengers are forced into the secure area along with the connecting passengers. A separate exit would have eliminated this.
>>Did you read the article? They guy is right on point. It is a RIGHT to move about this country in any manner you desire as long as you are a citizen and in good standing. The sky as claimed by the Federal government is a public right of way. You have a right and the ability to use a public right of way. There is legal precedence for this and this is the was the TSA should be beaten.<<
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article.
What is your problem>
>>Did you read the article? They guy is right on point. It is a RIGHT to move about this country in any manner you desire as long as you are a citizen and in good standing. The sky as claimed by the Federal government is a public right of way. You have a right and the ability to use a public right of way. There is legal precedence for this and this is the was the TSA should be beaten.<<
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article.
What is your problem?
>>Did you read the article? They guy is right on point. It is a RIGHT to move about this country in any manner you desire as long as you are a citizen and in good standing. The sky as claimed by the Federal government is a public right of way. You have a right and the ability to use a public right of way. There is legal precedence for this and this is the was the TSA should be beaten.<<
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article.
What is your problem?
“Did you read the article?”
Did you read my response to the article? I quoted the fourth amendment. You REALLY jumped the gun on this one. Please read before posting.
Then you forgot your sarcasm tag.
I do try to make my point in one post not four but hey each to his own.
Sarcasm tag after WHAT? An excerpt from the article itself, the exact text of the fourth amendment, or this:
“Flying is not a right, but grabbing my crotch or my kid’s IS? WRONG.”
???
Maybe you need to read more closely before posting.
You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?
You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?
You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?
You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?
You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?
You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.