Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate - Rand Paul Launching Campaign to End TSA

http://www.infowars.com/rand-paul-launches-campaign-to-end-the-tsa/

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Senator Rand Paul has issued a press release in which he vows to lead the charge to “end the TSA” and put a stop to the needless and humiliating groping of toddlers and grandmothers.

Earlier this year, Paul was detained by the TSA after refusing to submit to an invasive pat down after already having passed through a body scanner. The incident prompted national headlines and caused the Senator to miss his flight.

“It’s time to END the TSA and get the government’s hands back to only stealing our wallets instead of groping toddlers and grandmothers,” says Paul in the statement.

The accompanying article sent out to Campaign for Liberty members encourages recipients to sign a petition in support of Rand Paul’s ‘End the TSA’ bill.

The legislation would forcibly privatize the TSA and kick government out of airport security entirely. A recently passed bill actually allows airports to replace TSA screeners with private security but they have to go through a complex TSA permission process to do so, meaning only a handful of small airports have applied to evict the TSA.

Lets hope this one goes somewhere.

You'll forgive me if I don't get excited. Thousands of bills are introduced in each session of Congress, touting some cause or another. Most of them die in committee.

If/when this hits the floor of the House Senate, I'll start paying attention.

Rand Paul isn't up for reelection for another 4.5 years if anyone is concerned about that being among is motives for introducing this bill.

From government gate rapers to private gate rapers - not much of a difference in the big scheme of things as private screeners follow the same CFRs and procedures. There might be a bit more accountability when things go wrong in terms of theft but I fail to see where shifting to private screeners addresses the fundamental issue at hand.

The fundamental issue is not who employs the people who perform these un-Constitutional procedures, it's that these un-Constitutional procedures are being performed at all, either by a direct government employee or a contractor.

Until the courts begin to reign in the federal government's rampant disregard for the Bill of Rights, private vs public is an almost meaningless distinction in airport security.

Cost and accountability may change if screening is privatized, but there is no way to guarantee that they will change for the better, if at all.

If Congress really wanted to pass some laws that would have a direct affect on TSA, they should pass laws against declaring any government procedure or information secret without being vetted against the established protocols for classified information (eliminating the SSI classification), and preventing any rule, regulation, or operating procedure that applies to the general public from being secret, sensitive, guarded, or hidden in any way.

Once the disgusting SSI category of info is gone, then we'll be able to get copies of the SOP manuals using FOIA, and we'll be able to file successful lawsuits against TSA personnel who violate SOP while abusing travelers - because violating the SOP would invalidate their qualified immunity.

And maybe then, and only then, would TSOs begin to act with a little more caution in what they say and do, because only then would their actions bring direct, personal consequenses to them.

Rand Paul isn't up for reelection for another 4.5 years if anyone is concerned about that being among is motives for introducing this bill.

Maybe not, but his father is currently running for president of the United States.

http://www.chooseliberty.org/tsa_sign.aspx?pid=0501n

Please sign this so Rand Paul can have support for his legislation to finally end the TSA and make travel so much better for all the frequent fliers on here.

I already have given my support. I am not asking you to send funds though you can if you choose to.

Our leaders are listening and it is time to change the air travel system to focus on the real threats, not innocent citizens.

You know that even if this happens, nothing stops TSA from writing the SOP in the language that would cover pretty much anything. What would be the point of knowing that? I had a very humiliating experience today but I have to admit that they pretty much follow the procedure and the only problem was with the actual procedure and the TSO threatening me with not flying and calling the police. Since it was all verbal, there is nothing I would be able to prove in any case. Publishing the SOP would do just about nothing in this situation.

this might belong in another forum.....mod alert sent for review....

legislation to finally end the TSA and make travel so much better for all the frequent fliers on here.



Three short thoughts before others start their moaning and keening about the legitimacy of this thread:

1. Better the devil you know ...

2. In spite of all the horror stories, I think that the traveling public (and the rest of the world) needs some sort of guarantee the flying to, from, and inside the United States will remain safe.

3. Please explain how the abolition of the TSA would "make travel so much better for all the frequent flyers on here".

Three short thoughts before others start their moaning and keening about the legitimacy of this thread:

1. Better the devil you know ...

2. In spite of all the horror stories, I think that the traveling public (and the rest of the world) needs some sort of guarantee the flying to, from, and inside the United States will remain safe.

3. Please explain how the abolition of the TSA would "make travel so much better for all the frequent flyers on here".

Those who have been to the airport know what I am talking about. The thread was self explanatory. Everyone knows the abuses of the TSA who has flown by now who have gotten subject to patdowns or were abused themselves or had a child who got abused under the process.

Back in the old days all they did was require you to take off shoes, nowadays they require a full patdown or a body scanner and many many people can not go thru the body scanners more than you think for legitimate reasons.

i have never gone thru security where all in had to do was take off my shoes.....

in the late 50's, when i first flew commercial, you walked thru the airport door to the check in counter and then to the gate and on to the plane....

but, when the hijacking begin, the security checks were put in place and gradually became more onerous.....the shoe thing is fairly recent, it started w/the shoe bomber incident in dec 2001....

i do not see why a kid or an old lady(person) cannot be carrying a bomb. is there some rule against it? i actually would like to see a tightening of the rules. i think the 1 qt of 3 oz bottles is a great danger. a group of 5 or 10 people can bring in a gallon of bad stuff. it can be blended in the bathroom at the terminal and carried on. i am allowed to bring squash racquets on board. with just a few mods, these become broad swords, or axes. what you think those guys in the caves are talking about, how to get back to the gold standard? i cannot believe there is no protection at the end of runways.

both pauls should be involuntarily committed as far as i am concerned

I agree. Lets open up the gates and let everyone fly free of the dreaded search.
I don't know about you but I do not think I would feel free. I would be worried the guy down there on the left that looks nervous and is sweating is not thinking about offing us all. There is stories about kids and old ladies being searched but we can not profile what a terrorist looks like and if we did then all the McVeigh's here will have it made. Yes, it takes some time to get through security but it does seem more secure with all of this than the alternative.

I have no problem abolishing the TSA but I would want to know what was taking its place first. We obviously need some security check before plane travel and I don't have a problem with some of the current procedures (though some definitely need to be abolished). The real issue is that they have hired low-life, uneducated thugs to be on the front lines and that's just a recipe for disaster. If they simply changed their standards for who they hire a lot of the problems would be solved.

I personally wouldn't sign the petition until I knew what the alternative plan was.

This is apt for moving to the appropriate travel security forum. Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator, TravelBuzz.

My $0.02: Turn TSA responsibilities over to VA and make airport security a guaranteed job for either returning vets without something else lined up or retired service members who need something to do. They have the instincts as well as the honor to do this the right way and it would be a way of employing a few million people to whom our country actually owes something.

My $0.02: Turn TSA responsibilities over to VA and make airport security a guaranteed job for either returning vets without something else lined up or retired service members who need something to do. They have the instincts as well as the honor to do this the right way and it would be a way of employing a few million people to whom our country actually owes something.

Except that several TSOs claiming to be ex military have no problem with goosing the American public. It really doesn't matter who is goosing you, IMO. The issue is that there are limits that should be respected. Getting genital, butt, and breast contact for no reasonable cause should be out of bounds, period. Doing this at random to people, again for no cause, is as un American as you can get.

already discussed the thread.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate/1342628-rand-paul-legislation-end-tsa.html

Mods, please locked the thread or merge this thread. Thanks!

already discussed the thread.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate/1342628-rand-paul-legislation-end-tsa.html

Based on timestamps, it looks like this one was started before that one.

All,

Feel free to sign the petition to end the TSA.

http://www.chooseliberty.org/tsa_sign.aspx?pid=0501n

Send the letter to your US Congressman immediately.

Except that several TSOs claiming to be ex military have no problem with goosing the American public. It really doesn't matter who is goosing you, IMO. The issue is that there are limits that should be respected. Getting genital, butt, and breast contact for no reasonable cause should be out of bounds, period. Doing this at random to people, again for no cause, is as un American as you can get.

That's all true, however I believe that if you have an entire organization that are military vets you'll have more of that culture rub off on everyone and I think it is a much more positive one than what exists now. Not to mention there's a certain camaraderie that exist besides "I got my WalMart application rejected too!". Besides, when you have people who have seen real combat and know what real danger looks like they're less likely, IMO, to believe that they are truly the last line of defense against mythical terrorists.

i do not see why a kid or an old lady(person) cannot be carrying a bomb.The likelihood of such a thing is incredibly tiny, much smaller then the already minuscule chance of a terrorist attack on aviation.

i think the 1 qt of 3 oz bottles is a great danger. a group of 5 or 10 people can bring in a gallon of bad stuff. it can be blended in the bathroom at the terminal and carried on.No danger at all. There is no chance at all that a completed stable liquid explosive can get on an aircraft - even without any liquid restrictions.

Ron and Rand Paul seem to be the only ones in the entire government that can even make their mouths form the words liberty and freedom. Petition signed.

i do not see why a kid or an old lady(person) cannot be carrying a bomb. is there some rule against it? i actually would like to see a tightening of the rules. i think the 1 qt of 3 oz bottles is a great danger. a group of 5 or 10 people can bring in a gallon of bad stuff. it can be blended in the bathroom at the terminal and carried on. i am allowed to bring squash racquets on board. with just a few mods, these become broad swords, or axes. what you think those guys in the caves are talking about, how to get back to the gold standard? i cannot believe there is no protection at the end of runways.

both pauls should be involuntarily committed as far as i am concerned

I do not see why people constantly bring up theoretical, unsubstantiated, or even physically impossible "threats" and use it as a justification for a very real abuse of civil rights by the US government.

There is no liquid explosive in existence that is stable enough to be smuggled aboard an airplane without detonating in the car on the way to the airport. There is no liquid explosive in existence that can be mixed in situ at an airport and is stable enough to get it aboard an airplane without detonating during the mix or from the bomber's footsteps as he walks out of the bathroom stall.

I wish I owned stock in the movie studio that owns Die Hard 3, because it's obvious to me that the movie fantasy of stable "binary liquid" explosive that was introduced by this movie is so rampant that the movie is being viewed thousands of times per day. It must be bringing in a fortune in royalties for the studio. Bruce Willis and Sam Jackson must have put their kids through college on that flick.

You think you can mod a squash racket into a broadsword or an axe with materials found inside the sterile area of an airport? What are you going to use for BLADES? And you have the nerve to cast aspersions on the sanity of the Pauls...

That's all true, however I believe that if you have an entire organization that are military vets you'll have more of that culture rub off on everyone and I think it is a much more positive one than what exists now. Not to mention there's a certain camaraderie that exist besides "I got my WalMart application rejected too!". Besides, when you have people who have seen real combat and know what real danger looks like they're less likely, IMO, to believe that they are truly the last line of defense against mythical terrorists.

Actually, I believe the military culture is totally inappropriate to a civilian agency of any kind, particularly one which deals with the general public on a routine basis.

Military culture is predicated upon "OBEY OBEY OBEY!" at all times, without question. Even QUESTIONING, much less disobedience, is considered a crime in the military. You think things are bad with the current crop of TSOs, you'd get a whole 'nother level of abuse and apathy, backed up with threats of force, if you replaced them all with ex-military.

We cannot use the people, or the techniques, of war-fighting and counter-insurgency to screen people at the airport. Such a move would, in effect, be declaring open war on the traveling public and abandon all current semblance of trying to keep us "safe"; there would be virtually no difference between such an agency and the Gestapo or the SS or the KGB.

We may hold our veterans in high regard, we may be grateful for their service, but we must never forget that a military mindset is fundamentally incompatible with a free society.

using contractors rather than feds allows the pols to have more pork to repay contributors.....thats the reason////

Actually, I believe the military culture is totally inappropriate to a civilian agency of any kind, particularly one which deals with the general public on a routine basis.

Military culture is predicated upon "OBEY OBEY OBEY!" at all times, without question. Even QUESTIONING, much less disobedience, is considered a crime in the military. You think things are bad with the current crop of TSOs, you'd get a whole 'nother level of abuse and apathy, backed up with threats of force, if you replaced them all with ex-military.

We cannot use the people, or the techniques, of war-fighting and counter-insurgency to screen people at the airport. Such a move would, in effect, be declaring open war on the traveling public and abandon all current semblance of trying to keep us "safe"; there would be virtually no difference between such an agency and the Gestapo or the SS or the KGB.

We may hold our veterans in high regard, we may be grateful for their service, but we must never forget that a military mindset is fundamentally incompatible with a free society.POD ^

A lot of the attitudinal problems among TSA workers is precisely because many are ex-military and ex-law enforcement. Those kinds have an ingrained "in charge" mindset.

Three short thoughts before others start their moaning and keening about the legitimacy of this thread:

1. Better the devil you know ...

2. In spite of all the horror stories, I think that the traveling public (and the rest of the world) needs some sort of guarantee the flying to, from, and inside the United States will remain safe.

3. Please explain how the abolition of the TSA would "make travel so much better for all the frequent flyers on here".

Flatly disagree with these statements.
1) Given the TSA, I'll take the devil I don't know.
2) I don't expect any guarantees of safety in life, from government or anybody. Neither should you or anybody else. All I ask for is reasonable common sense precautions, that fall within limits of acceptability under the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. There is no way to 100% protect air travel, and we don't need to. 95% may be good enough to achieve without abrogating our Constitutional rights. I would rather keep the civil liberties our Founding Fathers/Mothers fought for and live with some risk of being blown out of the sky.

Risk is all around us. Including the risk of dying, every day, doing all kinds of everyday things that don't involve airplanes...like climbing stairs, and driving. I'm tired of Nanny State attitudes wherever they may come from.

POD ^

A lot of the attitudinal problems among TSA workers is precisely because many are ex-military and ex-law enforcement. Those kinds have an ingrained "in charge" mindset.

Actually, I believe a lot of the attitudinal problems are because they're ex-military or ex-law enforcement as a result of not being able to hack it as real military or real law enforcement...

After all - if they were actually competent at military or law enforcement functions, they'd still be there - or be retired.

I do not see why people constantly bring up theoretical, unsubstantiated, or even physically impossible "threats" and use it as a justification for a very real abuse of civil rights by the US government.

Because it is a politically expedient way of gaining the ability to abridge those rights. This is nothing new: it was done with good effect during WWII (Japanese Americans rounded up and shipped off to "camps"), it was done with Indians (how the west was won), and it was done during the Joseph McCarthy era.

At a forum a couple of weeks ago, I heard Chertoff state that the DHS used that method back when he was running things... because it was effective.

As long as "fear" can be used to control people, it will continue to be effective.

POD ^

A lot of the attitudinal problems among TSA workers is precisely because many are ex-military and ex-law enforcement. Those kinds have an ingrained "in charge" mindset.

I think what people are missing about what I said is that I do not believe in just changing who TSA hires; rather disband the organization altogether and let a completely different entity, whose stated mission is to take care of vets and get them back on their feet when needed (their success is questionable, though). This is not a military organization per se, and its goal is helping people vs butt-covering/assumptions of wrongdoing.

Actually, I believe the military culture is totally inappropriate to a civilian agency of any kind, particularly one which deals with the general public on a routine basis.

We may hold our veterans in high regard, we may be grateful for their service, but we must never forget that a military mindset is fundamentally incompatible with a free society.

You must be a NON-vet. There are several million veterans serving in all sectors and doing just fine. We can think for ourselves, but clearly understand the concept of teamwork, dedication, and determination. By the way, it's "former vet". We are never "ex".

By the way, it's "former vet". We are never "ex".

No, it is "vet" -- not "former vet" -- we never stop being vets.

POD ^

A lot of the attitudinal problems among TSA workers is precisely because many are ex-military and ex-law enforcement. Those kinds have an ingrained "in charge" mindset.

I didn't think there were that many TSOs who were ex-military or ex-LEO; the impression I've always gotten is that most of the TSOs I encounter are average civilians who got a job with TSA and bought into the "we're all heroes saving the world!" mindset that's been ingrained into the organization from the beginning.

But I have always believed that the biggest current problem with TSA is that Pistole is ex-FBI. The FBI seems to view civil rights as an annoying impediment toward their searching and interrogating people, and when Pistole got into a position of authority at TSA and knew that he could get away with just about anything under the administrative search doctrine, he ramped up the searches with the intent of turning airports into unrestricted criminal fishing expeditions.

I'm sure he loves the idea that HIS people can search ANYONE, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME they want and finally catch all of those scumbag drug dealers and check forgers and child pornographers that he's been after for so many years. He just doesn't care that in the process he's abusing millions of innocent people and trashing the very Constitution that (I presume) he swore to preserve, protect, and defend when he was sworn in as an FBI agent.

You must be a NON-vet. There are several million veterans serving in all sectors and doing just fine. We can think for ourselves, but clearly understand the concept of teamwork, dedication, and determination. By the way, it's "former vet". We are never "ex".

My experience with vets is somewhat different from yours; I've encountered quite a few who took any questioning of their authority as a personal insult and responded with indignant fury. "INSTANT, WILLING OBEDIENCE TO ORDERS" is what my DI on Paris Island always said, and this mentality is quite common amongst vets from all services.

Naturally, it's not universal; I've also known quite a few vets who did not have this mentality and could work for TSA quite well, treating travelers with respect and dignity, using common sense rather than rote obedience, making their own decisions rather than constantly kicking everything up the ladder, and not violating anyone's Constitutional rights.

From government gate rapers to private gate rapers - not much of a difference in the big scheme of things as private screeners follow the same CFRs and procedures. There might be a bit more accountability when things go wrong in terms of theft but I fail to see where shifting to private screeners addresses the fundamental issue at hand.
From talking to my Congressman, he seemed to think this is a great idea because you would be able to sue private employees for assault. Look how well that's working out in SFO... (they have privatized security, but get more than their fair share of complaints on this forum).

Personally, I think that if airport security is privatized, they can do anything they want. It's not a violation of your rights if a private company does it. If an airline requires you to consent to a full body cavity search prior to flying on one of their planes, it's a private contract and you agreed to it when you purchased the ticket.

I think this may be one of the most dangerous things we could do, especially if TSA still controls the standards and protocols, but private companies enforce them. It was FAA protocols for cooperation with hijackers and terrorists that enabled 9/11.

No, it is "vet" -- not "former vet" -- we never stop being vets.

I stand corrected^

My experience with vets is somewhat different from yours; I've encountered quite a few who took any questioning of their authority as a personal insult and responded with indignant fury. "INSTANT, WILLING OBEDIENCE TO ORDERS" is what my DI on Paris Island always said, and this mentality is quite common amongst vets from all services.

This is somewhat true, this type of individual is usually hired by the TSA as a manager and above. ;)



Naturally, it's not universal; I've also known quite a few vets who did not have this mentality and could work for TSA quite well, treating travelers with respect and dignity, using common sense rather than rote obedience, making their own decisions rather than constantly kicking everything up the ladder, and not violating anyone's Constitutional rights.

I also agree with your second statement and would add that this type is more common of the non managerial.

No, it is "vet" -- not "former vet" -- we never stop being vets.

Actually, it is veterans and not a vet. Got it?

Actually, it is veterans and not a vet. Got it?

Thank you. I was beginning to wonder why some people wanted to hire veterinarians to handle airport security. Exploding dogs, perhaps?

You must be a NON-vet. There are several million veterans serving in all sectors and doing just fine. We can think for ourselves, but clearly understand the concept of teamwork, dedication, and determination.
There are over twenty-two million veterans in the United States, and I agree that the previous poster has a warped view of military and veteran psychology. The military paradigm of authority relies on explicit rules that are formally promulgated and published, and on-the-spot corrections when a subordinate errs. Not to mention ingrained, automatic courtesy (when they are not talking in private or trying to kill someone). Everything the TSA does is anathema to that.

From talking to my Congressman, he seemed to think this is a great idea because you would be able to sue private employees for assault. Look how well that's working out in SFO... (they have privatized security, but get more than their fair share of complaints on this forum).


Right... and the mindless "say your name" game continues at SFO :rolleyes: