I asked:
In your opinion, SgtScott31, should we put government checkpoints on the streets? If you think not, then why not? Now assume that cost of erecting and operating the checkpoints is not prohibitive. Should we do it? If not, why not?
SgtScott31 replied negatively to at least one question then responded:
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
For the same reason everyone else does not want a checkpoint out on the street.
You dodged the questions. Why do
you think we should not put government checkpoints on our streets?
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
Problem is, FlyerTalk folks feel that checkpoints are not necessar at airports unless the TSOs apply horse-blinders and only look for C4 and Uzis.
My reading of the situation is that people here think that if checkpoints are neccessary for security and we choose to allow them for such then we should not allow them to be used for other purposes. Do you think they should be used for other purposes, such as checking everyone who flies for indication of completely unrelated legal violations?
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
I DO expect anyone with a conscious to report illegal items to the authorities just as I would expect someone to report crimes witnessed on the streets.
Let's leave illegal items out of this. We're discussing mostly the cases where something that could be completely legal is found -- cash, pipes, pets, etc. Do you or do you not think that an airport checkpoints should be used to check people for ill-gotten gains, pipes that contain residue of controlled substances, un-vaccinated pets, pornography depicting 17.5-year-olds, digital media players with data obtained via copyright violation, etc.?
I wrote:
Your opinions are dangerous to the United States of America -- more so if you are truly an officer of the law.
You responded:
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
Why?
Because, best I can tell, you support the idea that our government should search everyone just to find the few criminals. Do you or do you not support dragnet operations such as those conducted by TSA?
I wrote:
Therein lies the crux of the issue. In your hypothetical situation, the checkpoint is still good for keeping dangerous items off airplanes -- its stated purpose and the reason for which we allow these otherwise unconsitutional searches at airports -- but it's not so good for conducting an unconstitutional dragnet operation. The latter is what you want, isn't it?
You didn't answer my question. Is that what you want?
You wrote:
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
You took my statement out of context. I asked what good is a security checkpoint if someone with weapons can simply discontinue the screening process if they know they are about to get caught?
The answer, very simply, is that someone with weapons will not be allowed on the airplane.
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
As long as TSA's primary focus is on dangerous items, why is it so wrong that they also report other contraband to law enforcement?
First, keep in mind that they are reporting not only contraband, but suspected contraband and also something that is only contraband by their own definition: cash.
Second, what's wrong with it is that 1) every minute they spend dealing with, for instance, pipes that might be used to smoke crack (as TSA's blogger Bob described recently) is a minute that we're paying them not to enhance the security of our transportation systems, and 2) it means that the searches we allow them to perform because they of their threats of violence amount to dragnet operations, and those are completely un-American.
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
How do you impose a policy that forces them to turn a blind eye to anything but weapons?
You tell them, "Please search for weapons. When you are conducting warrantless searches of us for weapons, please, when you see something in our belongings that catches your attention, unless that item is a weapon, know that it is none of your business. If you see a pipe, assume it is free of residue of illegal substances and intended for use with legal substances. If you see some porn, assume that it contains people of legal age. If you see a pet, assume that it is licensed and has had its rabies shots. If you see some cash, assume that it belongs to the person holding it. If you see an digital music player, assume that the person holding it had permission to copy the data it contains onto it. If you see some papers, assume that they are not secret plans for world domination. If you see someone with brown skin, assume that he has a right to be where he is. None of that is any of your business. Your bag checkers' job is to find dangerous things. When you're not doing that, leave us alone. If you see someone being mugged at the terminal, sure, offer assistance, and if you find a head in a bag, sure, have someone look into it, but when anything else catches your eye and turns out not to be a weapon, go back to doing your job."