Actually, a number of us on FR did that as well. My tyrant radar goes off anytime government starts treading on Americans' liberty. And I campaigned for Mr. Bush and supported the Bush Doctrine. But a lot of the domestic infringements were wrong.
Posted on 11/20/2010 7:31:28 AM PST by chickadee
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is warning that any would-be commercial airline passenger who enters an airport checkpoint and then refuses to undergo the method of inspection designated by TSA will not be allowed to fly and also will not be permitted to simply leave the airport.
That person will have to remain on the premises to be questioned by the TSA and possibly by local law enforcement. Anyone refusing faces fines up to $11,000 and possible arrest.
"Once a person submits to the screening process, they can not just decide to leave that process," says Sari Koshetz, regional TSA spokesperson, based in Miami.
(Excerpt) Read more at sun-sentinel.com ...
DeMint’s appearance is here at about 1:18 in the video. He was nicer than I’d have been, and it was disappointing. I wouldn’t go so far as to call it kissing. Maybe flirting.
Hardly anyone in Congress seems to be concerned about liberty anymore.
Can someone please show me where I can find this in the US Code? Or are they simply making this one up as they go?
What kind of questions do you suppose will be asked of those who decide they don’t want to be groped?
I’d sure as heck rather answer questions about the purpose of my trip than have somebody feeling around on my body - knowing darn good and well that somebody really serious about getting a bomb on board would have it placed inside their body where none of the screening procedures would be effective at all EXCEPT the questions to screen for behaviors.
IOW, I would much rather have an effective, rigorous but non-invasive questioning than be groped only to be blown to bits mid-air anyway because the groping wasn’t effective at keeping me safe.
Were they disappointed when they saw what it really was?
Outstanding post. First one I’ve seen that speaks up against what some are condoning as the “new” perfect model for us. I do not wish to be interrogated to travel in what used to be a free country.
Just driving from AZ to TX, through a small part of NM, in May, on vacation, we were stopped at endless roadblocks. From the highway to smaller roads, we were interrogated about our vacation plans. Sniffed by dogs. All in the primary BP line.
And we have our F-150 with a camper shell — clearly visible (not tinted windows or anything), empty except for a couple of suitcases and a cooler. We are clean and clean-cut, if I do say so myself.
It disgusted me that we couldn’t even enjoy the sights without harassment. And yes, the Hispanic BP loved interrogating the stupid white people, while the one non-Hispanic BP we encountered let us go after we answered the citizenship question.
Yeah, that would be a real boon to the economy.
No matter how this fiasco ends the end result will in no way be good for the airlines, and the more time that passes the more and more I'm thinking that is the whole idea.
If you wanted to crash the economy quickly, this is a pretty good way to go about it.
Companies across the country prohibit this type of inappropriate touching.
If a company requires one to have their junk rubbed, is this a “hostile work environment”?
Well, I suppose their logic is this:
“If you were a terrorist and had a bomb... they are going to search you... you stop and leave and come back another day.”
The airlines are going to lose a lot of customers over the TSA’s bad behavior.
My brother brought up the fact that El Al flights are somewhere in the neighborhood of 60K a year. If that's the case, then extensive background checks may simply not be "scalable" in a model where there's up to 5,000 commercial flights in the air at any given moment.
I want to see Big Sis on a talk show undergo a love pat demonstration on TV ambush style. Let’s see if she submits.
That's the part that trips me out. I can distinctly remember having conversations prior to the 2008 election with co-workers who ended up voting for Obama. They really 'felt' that listening in on cell phone conversations in Pakistan of terrorists who have never set foot on American soil somehow violated their Constitutional rights against unreasonable search. Yet they are now silent when it comes to these airport searches. They are constantly re-arranging the new reality in their minds in order to justify their earlier feelings. I have begged them to never vote again in a national election since our founding fathers never intended for anyone so non-rational to vote in the first place.
I do not know how many flights El Al has each year. 60K could be right on the money. I do know that Ben Gurion Airport handles roughly 10M passengers annually. By comparison, almost 700M flew in the US in 2008. You're dead on, we are talking about an enormous difference in scale.
To do what the Israelis do (if you really wanted to do that), you would see a TSA that would have to probably triple (or more) in size. This of course is something else that is ignored.
That’s what I will do, I didn’t fly much anyway, but I won’t at all now. Let the airlines go broke, then the TSA can pat each other down....
#1: At no time do you have to answer any questions from any law enforcement agent or agency. It is not just after you have been advised of your Miranda rights, it is any time whatsoever.
#2: The TSA has no legal right to take any steps to ensure you pose no threat to the GENERAL PUBLIC, as they now claim. The Transportation Security Administration can secure transportation, but once you announce that you refuse to be further searched and give up your right to fly, they have no mandate to proceed further.
They would argue that you have entered a secure area, and like the police officer who can arrest someone for drunk driving before they actually start or move the car, they can continue the investigation. However, considering the number of false positives (the number of people who set off the alarm but are not found to have any weapons or explosives) is somewhere around 99.999%, they would be hard-pressed to argue that just the metal detecting arch alarm was probable cause to believe you were a danger to the public.
If I set off the metal detection alarm, I personally have no problem with the full body scanner. If someone wants to get off looking at my Johnson, so be it. Mrs MindBender is very opposed however to either the Playboy of the Sky photos or the grope search now conducted.
If we are stopped and they want search her, we will gladly provide any identification they want to see. We will request that a local LEO be there as a witness at all times. I will politely announce i am invoking my Miranda rights re any intrusive questioning, but I would answer any reasonable questions (what flight, pack own bags, etc.) However, once I refuse to answer any question under Miranda, i will answer nothing more.
After they have had time to look at our IDs, (say 5-10 min) check us out, I will ask if they still demand a full body scan or physical search of my wife. If they answer yes, I will announce our intent to not fly and ask if we are under arrest.
They will probably answer, no, but we could be.
I will say, fine, do so if you must, but you do so without our permission. You know who we are if you want to seek criminal charges later, but we are leaving. I would then politely and quietly walk out.
I would them immediately file suit. They have unreasonably denied me my rights to engage in interstate commerce, use of a federally regulated entity, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Let them then be on the defensive. Watch how fast the lemmings run them.
THE ABOVE IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE OR COUNSEL IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER. PLEASE OBTAIN LEGAL ADVICE FROM YOUR LEGAL COUNSEL BEFORE TAKING ANY SUCH ACTION.
Actually, a number of us on FR did that as well. My tyrant radar goes off anytime government starts treading on Americans' liberty. And I campaigned for Mr. Bush and supported the Bush Doctrine. But a lot of the domestic infringements were wrong.
“The ideas that lead to this: have never gone away. They re-surface and find their application when these monsters acquire control of the apparatus of the state. When that control becomes absolute, mass murder begins. There is only one way to stop it.”
“Podesta: Obama Can Use ‘Armed Forces’ to Push Progressive Agenda (WTF?!?)”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2629356/posts
Obama has declared war against the people of the United States.
The BIG difference is that the Israelis only interrogate those that meet their profile of a potential problem. They do not do it to everyone and in fact, they publicize the types they will interrogate.
I don’t specifically know how difficult it would be to train people to spot the responses, but I would guess it really wouldn’t be that difficult. It certainly would, however, require a higher standard for TSA personnel, and this is likely the biggest reason why it will never be done.
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.