Location: Newport Beach, California, USA (Recently of San Francisco)
Programs: UA-1P,SPG-Gold,Marriott-Silver
Posts: 10,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
And here I, too, thought England's Magna Carta was one of the documents that the Constitution of the United States was based on.
You're mistaken -- the Constitution is not based on the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta was one of the first proclamations to recognize the existence of rights in a natural law context. However, it also recognize royal sovereignty, a concept expressly rejected by the Constitution.
Quote:
Damn! All that education washed down the drain!
It would appear so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSORon
+1
I guess I'm not the only one that was in class that day.
If you were, you weren't paying attention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSORon
"Is this your bag?"
Very good. That is, indeed, a legitimate question. It is not, however, part of the administrative search as it merely associates the passenger with a bag that will be subject to a bag check. This is similar to the other question that frequently follows it, "May I inspect your bag?" It's a silly question because the law is clear that once a passenger enters the checkpoint, though he voluntarily submits to the inspection he may not withdraw consent.
Any other legitimate questions, or are we agreed that, other than, "Is this your bag?" no other questioning is either necessary or appropriate.
Last edited by scoow; Jul 8, 09 at 4:35 pm.
Reason: merge multiple consecutive posts
Oh, Bart, you're still here? Could you please reconcile your conflicting statements about the purpose of questioning someone about a white powder found in his luggage that you suspect is explosive?
TSORon said he can refer anyone to secondary he wants, that's a nice fat abuse of power.
It's not an abuse until some court rules it to be abuse; or Congress perhaps, yeah that's gonna happen real soon.
I don't know how many "Rons" are out there in airports, but I know for sure they are and there are too many. TSA HQ doesn't care (obviously) nor have they attempted to find out why so many of their employees routinely abuse their powers. Do they really believe they have such authority or do they simply exceed it just for ****'n'giggles ?
Even if steps were taken to curb the rogues I doubt it would have any long-term effect. Heads down for a few weeks then back to the same old same old. They need to be FIRED; all of them and I am certain that cannot be done even if there were the will, which there clearly is not.
But I am grateful that some TSO's have documented their umm... principles for all to see; we should encourage them to continue to dig ever larger holes.
This is similar to the other question that frequently follows it, "May I inspect your bag?" It's a silly question because the law is clear that once a passenger enters the checkpoint, though he voluntarily submits to the inspection he may not withdraw consent.
To "May I inspect your bag" should be followed up with a question such as:
Why, do you have cause to suspect something in my bag is not allowed?
In other words did the bag alarm or not. If your not a selectee and the bag did not alarm I think the Administrative Inspection has concluded at that point. Anything more would be be investigative in nature and a person would have to advised of their rights.
To "May I inspect your bag" should be followed up with a question such as:
Why, do you have cause to suspect something in my bag is not allowed?
In other words did the bag alarm or not. If your not a selectee and the bag did not alarm I think the Administrative Inspection has concluded at that point. Anything more would be be investigative in nature and a person would have to advised of their rights.
Pre-TSA, this was the standard question; now there is no question, just "I need to inspect this bag." Several times when asked the question, I didn't respond, but they just inspected anyways. I would tell them after the inspection that I never did say it was okay to inspect. They were quite rote in their actions and always expected people to say yes.
At least on one occasion, they wanted to randomly inspect my bag and I refused and was able to leave that checkpoint. Went to another, passed through without a random check and waved to the screeners at the first checkpoint as I walked by. Ahh, the good old days.
__________________ We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.
1...I have a very basic question about all of this. If I'm walking down the street, and someone sees that I have something that might be illegal, they are perfectly free to summon a LEO to investigate. However, do they actually have any right to detain me pending the arrival of said LEO, or am I free to walk away?
2...If I'm free to walk away, than what right does the TSA have to detain me if they've already cleared me of having any prohibited items? Can't I just walk away at that point?
1...No,Yes---2...None,,,Yes...No gray area based on as posted.
__________________ Never Underestimate The Importance Of Innocence To The Innocent Man
If I see you walking down the street an you have something that may be illegal I can detain you while I summon a LEO. BUT to do so I must follow the "citizen's arrest" law of the state I am in. I am personally exposed to any liability that stems from my actions.
Only if an LEO is present can you invoke the CA. ie:" You think you see a baggie of heroine so you "grab" and or whatever to "stop" his movements until an LEO arrives". Big monster No No! and you reap the consequences.
__________________ Never Underestimate The Importance Of Innocence To The Innocent Man
Only if an LEO is present can you invoke the CA. ie:" You think you see a baggie of heroine so you "grab" and or whatever to "stop" his movements until an LEO arrives". Big monster No No! and you reap the consequences.
I am not sure I am following you but in the state of Florida, it is LEGAL for a citizen to arrest someone for a felony or breach of peace. This is common law and has been held up by the courts on a number of occasions.
Same for a campground operator, same for a merchant (different statutes but they read out the same)
The general rule I go by is this. If there is no property in immediate danger (theft, destruction, etc.) or no person is in immediate danger, I call a cop and let them deal with it.
You may have been in class, but you weren't paying attention.
When you say "the Constitution is not the only law, it is the basis for our laws," you demonstrate an appalling lack of understanding about the form and function of the Constitution. The laws that govern our daily life flow from the authority set out in the Constitution. None of the words in the Constitution are without force and effect, except those superseded by amendments, unless such amendments are repealed. Except for the statement of purpose in the preamble, every word was intended by the Framers to be legally normative, and not just advisory, declaratory, aspirational, or exhortatory.
Yes, it is "based on other laws, laws from other nations and other times," but those other documents have limited precedential value. When Congress writes a law, they don't check to see if it comports with the Magna Carta.
These other documents have significant precedential value. A great example of this is "Due Process". The historical context of the rights enumerated in the Constitution are an important part of understanding their meaning.
You're mistaken -- the Constitution is not based on the Magna Carta. ...
interesting .... I remembered it the same way Bart did ... although probably "influenced by" would be a better choice of words than "based on". You can even find specific passages in the two documents that are very similar as I remember.
Last edited by WalkinBackToTexas; Jul 9, 09 at 8:17 am.
Reason: typo
It's not an abuse until some court rules it to be abuse; or Congress perhaps, yeah that's gonna happen real soon.
...
But I am grateful that some TSO's have documented their umm... principles for all to see; we should encourage them to continue to dig ever larger holes.
I beg to differ. It is an abuse, when and where it happens. However, we have due process and we cannot stop the abuse until and unless a court will find it is abusive and order it stopped. Even then, we must find a way to enforce the order of the court. And who is charged with enforcing the orders of the court?
interesting .... I remembered it the same way Bart did ... although probably "influenced by" would be a better choice of words than "based on". You can even find specific passages in the two documents that are very similar as I remember.
I wouldn't put a great deal of faith in whatever you were taught in Civics.
The Magna Carta was far from a "constitution" in the current and popular sense. What it was was an attempt by the English nobility to limit the powers of the king (John at the time). Certain aspects of existing English common law were cited and reaffirmed but virtually none applied to the entire population, just the privileged few. Right to trial by one's peers and freedom from arbitrary confinement were included but then systematically ignored in the ensuing centuries.
Quote:
In 1957 the American Bar Association acknowledged the debt American law and constitutionalism had to Magna Carta and English common law by erecting a monument at Runnymede. Yet, as close as Magna Carta and American concepts of liberty are, they remain distinct. Magna Carta is a charter of ancient liberties guaranteed by a king to his subjects; the Constitution of the United States is the establishment of a government by and for "We the People."
Quote:
The story of the influence of Magna Carta on American constitutional development is but one phase of the whole history of English institutions and law in America, and this in turn is but one chapter in the history of a broader, a further-reaching development—the extension of English institutions and of English Common and Statutory Law to the many political communities that have formed or still form parts of the British Empire. In studying Magna Carta in America we are concerned, therefore, with one feature and one only, of this whole vast process. But just as the influence of Magna Carta in England itself cannot be understood apart from the long history of the ever-changing body of rules and principles that go to make up the system of English Common Law, of which the provisions of Magna Carta form only a part, so, too, an understanding of the influence of Magna Carta in America can only be reached by considering this great legal document as but one of the many sources of English Common Law in its American environment.
An equally strong (or stronger) claim might be made that the Declaration of Independence and hence the Constitution was based on the Swiss Bundesbrief of 1295. The Founders were familiar with both documents and did incorporate some choice bits of both, but the US Constitution is a uniquely home-grown document and not based on anything but the thoughts and ideals of those who wrote it.
