Mission Creep at the TSA?

National Geographic Traveler ^ | Feb/Mar 2013 | Christopher Elliott

[Lion Den Dan]

So what are these roadside checks looking for? Is it my lawfully held side arm or the several guns and hundreds of rounds of ammo that I am transporting to a competition? Perhaps they seek the one or two thousand dollars in cash that I choose to carry while on a trip since I only use credit cards to secure lodging? This is starting to sound like Mexico with its roadside extortion kiosks.

[Rusty0604]

Thanks for sharing.

[alexander_busek]

Perhaps they seek the one or two thousand dollars in cash that I choose to carry while on a trip since I only use credit cards to secure lodging?

But how can they be sure that you aren't laundering that money? /s

Regards,

[Dad was my hero]

My thoughts when I read the article and decided to post it.

[Hoffer Rand]

Ask if the agent’s grandmother’s 4th amendment rights have also been violated.

Assuming the goon stopping you actually knows the content of the 4th Amendment. Debatable premise.

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

The name is “Transportation” Security Agency, not “Airline” Security Agency.

This is Obama’s goon squad to crack down on ALL forms of transportation. They will clamp down on car travel as soon as they have ramped up enough numbers of goons to do so.

People here say “just don’t fly”. Sorry, but this is going to extend to every form of travel, not just flight.

Kiss your freedom good-bye. The Republicans want this as much as the Democrats. We who love our liberty have no representation. None.

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

The same people who surrender their rights in the airport will also surrender their rights on the road. The bigger issue is that when the bulk of people surrender their rights, people like me just look crazy to the people in power. Because we no longer stand together in demanding our rights, my power is diminished with every passing year.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

“By some measures, the TSA has scored a clear success,” observed the nonpartisan Congressional Quarterly in a recent cover story. “No terrorist has staged a successful attack on a flight from a U.S. airport since September 11.” One of the most ardent defenders of the TSA is travel guidebook guru Arthur Frommer. “Every time I am patted down, I am grateful for security agents who take their jobs seriously,” he wrote on his blog. “I am conscious of the fact that their zealousness is deterring all sorts of would-be terrorists from attempting to carry weapons onto planes.”

Would someone please explain to these idiots that you can not "prove" anything with an absence of "proof". The fact that nothing has happened does not support the assertion that TSA is responsible for the lack of activity.

Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise (illicit negative) is a formal logical fallacy that is committed when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but one or two negative premises.
For example:

No terrorist attacks have taken place (negative premise), therefore TSA screening has prevented them (affirmative conclusion). This is a "non sequitur" because of the logical fallacy.

Regards,
GtG

[TSA-Watch]

TSA won’t be happy until they have installations at every major border crossing between the states.