Airport screeners 'touch' pregnant woman's breasts

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, December 25, 2002 | By Diana Lynne

[Area51]

To The American Sheeple

Merry Christ.. err feliz navidad

Your Presidente: JORGE DELANO BUSH!

[need_a_screen_name]

minimum wage federal goon squad

Odd, I thought all gov.org jobs paid pretty well.

[Area51]

Attention Bushbots:
Clean up, Isle 5- Stat

[MichiganConservative]

You have absolutely no right to travel in my vehicle or any particular airplane.

So wanting to fly on a commercial airline is probable cause for government agents to search your person and your effects? Simply because some other persons at one point in the past used airplanes to do some harm? Huh?

Hey, people sell drugs out of their cars. People kidnap people and use cars. People have used cars to break federal laws in the past. Maybe your car ought to be searched every time you cross state lines because you could possibly be doing what they were doing.

Hey, we want to stop drug trafficking and kidnapping, don't we? Aren't those noble ends that justify any means, including searching people that are most likely doing nothing wrong?

Are you one of those people who says "If you aren't doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide", too?

[need_a_screen_name]

So wanting to fly on a commercial airline is probable cause for government agents to search your person and your effects? Simply because some other persons at one point in the past used airplanes to do some harm? Huh?

As distasteful as it is, it is either that or no air service in this country at all. Allowing passengers to be armed would NEVER fly with the insurance companies, nor would it pass Congress. Look how hard it was just to get pilots armed.

Your comparison to traveling in automobiles is not comparable. Driving a car is not necessarily engaging in interstate commerce.

[kako]

LOL Great knee jerk reaction to a minor speed bump at the airport boarding planes...

It's not minor if the breasts belong to you, your wife or your daughter.
Or if you value the Constitution and liberty.

[Brytani]

However, being safe with ones person, possessions and papers IS a right and not one to be given and taken away at the whim of federal law enforcement. Check the Bill of Rights one day, you might be surprised to find what rights you actually have.

[RGSpincich]

The story is not anymore valid now, than before. Many believe this crybaby of a man was there and did create a ruckus but reject his version of the story. Especially the breech baby stuff, the ACLU stuff, the hyperbole surrounding the yearning for a "natural birth" of their child, etc. Sounds to me like another cup-of-hot-coffee-lawsuit effort to supplement this guy's ailing writing career. Now that he has a family and the main bread winner (his wife the accountant) is laid up, money gets tight.

[MichiganConservative]

Getting on an airplane does not necessarily mean I'm partaking in interstate commerce, either.

And, you missed where I said "state-line", as in you're driving your car to another state.

[need_a_screen_name]

I see what you mean. I wasn't defending the actions at the PDX airport. IF this story is true, then the guards should be dealt with and perhaps fired, just like any others who abuse the system. I'm only saying that if people prepare ahead of time (see post #7) that there are no major hassles at the airports getting on planes. People need to learn how to fly. This is a new day. I'm not against profiling either, but in this PC age, that ain't gonna happen. We can get on with our lives and travel when we please if we want. I can't wait to fly again.

[FSPress]

Driving a car is not necessarily engaging in interstate commerce

Yes, driving a car is engaging in interstate commerce. The car, it component parts, the fuel, lubricants, etc are products of interstate commerce and can thus be regulated to any extent needed by the federal government. In fact the clothing that you wear has moved in interstate commerce and it's wearing could be regulated under the commerce clause. They can require that you be publically stripped for search before riding in an airplane. Modern intrusive, restrictive government is erected on the foundation of twisting the commerce clause into unrecognizable shapes.

Those who would sacrifice freedom for a little security deserve neither and will get neither.

[Brytani]

Those who agree with body searches of pregnant women, infants etc seem to forget the term "probably cause". If a person sets off a metal detector at an airport, I have no problem with a wand inspection to determine the cause, or a body search if the cause can not be easily determined. (like a underwire bra etc). However, random body searches of people is another story.

If the carry on luggage of a passengar is checked and is fine and that same person does not set off a metal detector, there is absolutely no reason to search that person further. In those cases there is no probably cause to believe that person is a danger to anyone. However, if a person is found to have attempted to carry-on illegal objects onto a plane, or sets off metal detectors then there is probably cause.

[savedbygrace]

The fact that these are RANDOM searches makes them unreasonable, as in "no reason, just at random." If they were the result of profiling, they would be reasonable, as in "there was a reason we searched you; you fit the profile."

I'm hoping someone has the guts (and the money) to take that reasoning through the courts. Now that the screeners are federal employees, these random searches are in violation of the Constitution.

[need_a_screen_name]

Good point about the car, but I was going by my interpretaion of the clause, not the courts. I don't see any way that an airline who flies from one state to another is not engaging in interstate commerce. Most carry cargo as well as mail at times.

Those who would sacrifice freedom for a little security deserve neither and will get neither.

That quote isn't exactly word for word, but I get your meaning. What do you suggest as the solution to safe air travel these days without infringing on anyone's rights?

[need_a_screen_name]

Like the newspapers have reported, random searches at the gates are coming to an end. I agree, any of them is too many. Just don't set off the metal detectors when walking through and you won't be searched. What should that tell people? That you should be careful when planing your trip not to set them off. Weraing underwire bras is asking to be searched.... duh.

[MichiganConservative]

Allowing passengers to be armed would NEVER fly with the insurance companies, nor would it pass Congress.

How about swords, knives, canes, baseball bats with steel tips with the inscription "In case of emergency, beat terrorist with this." or other non-projectile-firing weapons? Congress is a bunch of wimps and sissies that care only about their own power.

[FSPress]

What do you suggest as the solution to safe air travel these days without infringing on anyone's rights?

The idea has been to create a sterile area where all travellers are guaranteed to be completely and totally defenseless and without weapons or potential weapons of any sort. Wolves like flocks of sheep like that!

[Sabertooth]

Let the airlines offer flights without random profiling, but with profiling for Middle Eastern folks, and see which planes weigh the most on take off. Let the market decide.

Moslem non-citizens should have been expelled within a week of 9/11. Instead, we get one PC snafu after another. Hard to blame that on Bill Clinton.