Law Dawg started this thread by asking:
Originally Posted by
law dawg
My question is- what parts of the TSA's mission and/or actions are unconstitutional.
Spiff answered with one example:
Originally Posted by
Spiff
Government-required identification for travel immediately comes to mind.
Law Dawg, seemingly attempting to minimize the inappropriate nature of TSA's airport ID policy, responded:
Originally Posted by
law dawg
Hell, we have to have government-required ID to drive too, do we not? Hell, we even have to have government-required ID (SSN) to do a lot of things. Loans, home purchase, etc. is near impossible without it.
In response, I explained why we are required to carry proof of identification and driver licensing when operating a moving vehicle on public roads:
Originally Posted by
pmocek
Only to drive on our public roads. And the identification is less significant than the licensing. We're required to receive a license in order to operate motor vehicles on public roads. Similarly, we're required to receive a license in order to operate an airplane in our public airways.
No license is required to ride as a passenger in a motor vehicle or an airplane.
I also responded to Law Dawg's example of loans and home purchases:
Originally Posted by
pmocek
Semantics aside, you have provided two examples of private agreements in which one party would reasonably expect to confirm the identity of the other party as part of the agreement. It's reasonable for a lender to demand identification of someone to whom it lends money as a condition of the agreement between it and that person. It's not reasonable for our government to monitor our movements or to require us to request and receive permission to move about our country.
Confusingly, Law Dawg responded to my point about driver licensing with:
Originally Posted by
law dawg
Very true.
However, you drive on roads, not through the nation's airspace. Any country on Earth will want to regulate what passes and doesn't pass in it's airspace. It's too vulnerable.
Military strategy 101 is control the airspace. There's a reason for that.
Law Dawg, I think you've made a false comparison, but I don't quite understand you.
In essence, I said, "That we are required to carry proof of driver license when we drive does not support the idea that we should be required to identify ourselves when riding as a passenger in an airplane. With both motor vehicles and airplanes, we require licensing when someone wishes to operate the machinery in a public place, but no license is required to ride as a passenger in either case." I didn't say anything about regulating airspace.
Could you please rephrase your previous comment?