Posted on 11/18/2010 6:19:21 AM PST by markomalley
Thanks to misguided immigration policy, the US Government doesn't have a clue - making successful profiling much more difficult. That blond, blue-eyed kid with an Iowa driver's license and a Swedish last name could just as easily be a Muslim from Kosovo who snuck in across the Mexican border and easily obtained a fake ID. Israel doesn't have to worry about possibilities like that.
TSA's semi-competence probably means it doesn't matter, but there is always going to have to be some kind of electronic screening, unless we want to start issuing Soviet-style internal passports to "certified" travelers...like politicians and bureaucrats.
But you are right that treating symptoms instead of curing diseases is the favorite sport of both parties. So I don't expect anything beyond additional tweaking of the process to keep the plucked goose from squawking too loudly.
That's just it, isn't it. We all realize that what the TSA is doing is unreasonable. Why do we believe/know it is unreasonable?
It isn't going to stop the terrorist. We already know that, we already realize that. We know what they are doing is essentially fruitless in the face of an ill defined enemy.
This is what makes this a violation of our Rights. They have no reasonable cause to be searching people in this manner. I am sorry, but if they pull you aside for a search they had better have a reason other than "random."
No, it is time for people to exercise their Rights. It is time to not be afraid of these ill conceived "rules" that violate our Rights. It is time to make the government DEFINE THE ENEMY. The time for playing nice, nice is over. If we have to lose our Rights because of some misconstrued political correctness SOB...it is time to formerly revolt.
Stop them from respecting the enemy. Demand they define the enemy they are "searching for."
Also Wikipedia is - as usual - wrong about the details of the Act.
Then you’ll have to explain what you mean carefully and simply because I am so dang stupid.
What details about the Fugitive Slave Laws did my extract from Wikipedia get wrong in your esteemed, knowing and wise opinion?
And then and only then, for the first request is a prerequisite assignment — in what ways did I display my utter mental deficiency in the form of confusions as to what is law and how it works now.
I'd suggest that this kind of nonsense is going to go on until one of two things happen:
1. Substantial numbers of airline passengers decide to eliminate all their discretionary air travel, thereby hurting the airline industry.
2. One or more terrorists figure out that the TSA's own idiotic screening process has now produced a scenario where the most effective way to attack airline passengers is to focus on the large hordes of them gathered in line at airline terminals waiting to be screened by the TSA.
IF they would screen EVERY ONE the same, then there is no problem. They have to be PC and muzzies are not to be touched, because it isn’t PC. My hubby sets off the bells with his partial knee. At 70 he didn’t even want them to touch the metal button on his pants.
And there has to be a better way to handle screening small children than terrifying them. We’ve taught them NO one is to touch the ‘bikini zone’, to fight, scream, etc when some one does.
http://www.ctnow.com/news/wxin-man-punches-tsa-screener-at-in-111810,0,1368312.story
“But Christina says that the punch was intended to be a joke, not a challenge to the agent’s authority or the agency’s security procedures.
Christina stated he has had several medical issues and asked the TSA screener a question about the screening process.
When the TSA screener said he did not know, Christina “jokingly lightly punched him in the chest” and told him you should know.”
You're correct, laws on the book can be used as prescedent, but the basis/ruling for the laws you cited is property rights.
That's why I would consider these laws as "moot."
Citizens are not property. That's why I doubt anyone would go into Federal Court and argue the Fugitive Slave Law or Dred Scott to support the governemnt's right to "grope" airline passengers.
Why are almost all the TSA screeners black?
Government union (ie, “patronage”) jobs for a politically favored demographics.
The 13th amendment changed the status of slaves. No longer did the law see them as property but people. The 14th amendment made these people now citizens equal under the law.
The 13th amendment cancelled out the foundation on which the Dred Scott ruling or the Fugitive Slave Law was built.
Citizens cannot suddenly be treated as property. There is no basis in the law for that.
By legal cavil we must not let our government place upon us captation. Cavilis a captious are all the chains of bad legislation layered with iron link nets of stare decisis when they come to tell us that bad is good. That indecent pat downs are a public good and necessity, that homosexuality is a right, that marriage is foolish, and perversion proper for all.
I was nowhere near Indiana, tagline notwithstanding.
I don't think you're stupid at all.
What details about the Fugitive Slave Laws did my extract from Wikipedia get wrong in your esteemed, knowing and wise opinion?
It really isn't a matter of opinion. The full text of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 is readily available and it's only about three pages long.
Wikipedia says "the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 made any Federal marshal or other official who did not arrest an alleged runaway slave liable to a fine of $1,000" and this is simply not correct.
According to the actual law as written, the fine applies solely to federal marshals and deputy federal marshals, not to "any . . . other official" - which would imply that the Act imposed this obligation on state as well as federal officials, which it carefully avoided doing specifically because of the constitutional issues involved.
in what ways did I display my utter mental deficiency in the form of confusions as to what is law and how it works now.
Confusion and "utter mental deficiency" are two different things. Don't conflate them.
I think you are confused because you made reference to "precedent law" (by which I think you may mean "legal precedent" which is not in itself law) and use this to assert that the Fugitive Slave Act is still operative federal law.
Since the Act deals solely and specifically with property claims in human beings, and since the Constitution has since been amended to outlaw the holding of any property in human beings, the Act is no longer operative law.
No amount of legal precedent can make any law operative, and even less so if that law has been superseded by a constitutional amendment.
Legal precedents are not themselves laws and cannot be by their very nature.
What else describes the judges who reason that such indecent and obtrusive searches and naked-scanners are legal? THEY DO INDEED, IN ALL PRACTICAL EFFECT TURN US INTO CHATTEL HELD LIKE AFRICANS ON A SLAVE BOAT.
This is why common sense and morality must (outside of what has become the current accepted legal reasoning process) in the end reset, chop through and nullify all legal reasoning which produces such a result. In judges and legal scholars can’t not do that, then the people must, and if the nation’s people do not, then dissolution, chaos and the forces of destruction will.
2. One or more terrorists figure out that the TSA’s own idiotic screening process has now produced a scenario where the most effective way to attack airline passengers is to focus on the large hordes of them gathered in line at airline terminals waiting to be screened by the TSA.
************
Yes - that is why this all is so concerning to me. If “the bad guys” want to get us, they will - in the “free” areas of terminals, stadiums, bus stations and buses, trains and train stations, on the street, etc.
I fear that this is only the beginning...
The 13th and 14th Amendment effectively rendered the Fugitive Slave Law and Dred Scott null and void. This country no longer treat people as property.
Now, your last post is barely comprehensible. So, in the words of Denzel Washington. Explain it to me like I'm four.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.It does NOT refer to property, nor to person, except indirectly through the understandings of what slavery, servitude and party means. Nor does it revoke the precedents in law (aka "legal precedent") established by which men may be treated like property.
That was a poem of sorts, and as such a work of transcendence which must be enjoyed as is, without further intrusive and limiting explanation.
It is what it is.
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.