I posted this comment to the article, though I seriously doubt that the author will respond at all:
Originally Posted by WillCAD in the article's comments
>> You see, if I'm flying with my family and 200 other people,
>> I have a right to feel safe that no nut job was allowed.
>> on the plane with a bomb or weapon.
No, you do NOT have that right.
Your "right" to feel warm and fuzzy do not trump the right of everyone to be free from unreasonable search and siezure by the government. Your "right" to feel safer do not trump the right of everyone to be free from compelled testimony. Your "right" to feel la-dee-day safe from Bad People do not trump the right of everyone to unrestricted interstate travel.
But let's put it in a different context.
How many workplace shootings have their been in hospitals in the last 10 years? How many people have been killed by "nut jobs" entering hospitals with weapons? More than have been killed by terrorists on airplanes or in airports. A lot more....
Yet what would you think if I suggested TSA-style screening for every doctor, staff member, patient, or visitor who entered your hospital, Dr. Joe? Imagine having to be subjected to a whole body x-ray scan each time you entered the hospital. Imaging being randomly frisked when trying to enter a patient's room. Imagine that you were subjected to rules and regulations that could deny you access to your place of work - but the rules and regulations were secret and you were not allowed to read them.
Don't like it? Don't go to the hospital. Get treated at a clinic or private practice. There is no "right" to be treated in a hospital; maybe you have a "right" to medical care, but by placing unreasonable restrictions on entering a hospital, they're not denying you access to medical care, they're simply regulating just one method of getting medical care. After all, beter safe than sorry, right? I mean, if even ONE life is saved, isn't it worth a little inconvenience to enter a hospital?
Imagine all of that, Dr. Joe, and you've imagined what it's like to fly in America today.
America is not the only country to have been targeted by terrorists. Yet America is the only country still limiting liquids and gels. America is the only country still requiring all travelers to remove shoes. America is one of only a handful of countries still using the whole body imaging scanner as primary screening. And America's screener force has the worst reputation in the world as far as professionalism, competence, and plain old manners.
Face it, Dr. Joe - TSA is not getting the job done. Correlation does not equal causation - just because we haven't had planes falling out of the sky on a daily basis doesn't mean that TSA's methodology makes us any safer. But their methodology DOES make us significantly less free, and thus less American.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by
Schmurrr
That right is not in the Constitution.
Jesse Ventura was talking about a right that is in the Constitution.
What an inane article.
Oh, Schmurrr, please don't ever resort to that argument. It's completely baseless; just because a right is not enumerated in the Constitution doesn't mean there is no such right. That's what the 9th Amendment is all about
:
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
However, those rights which ARE enumerated in the Constitution are those which the Framers felt were of such paramount importance that they needed to be enshrined in the document in perpetuity to prevent the government from chipping away at them under the false premise that "well, the Constitution doesn't say you have the right to free speech!"
So, realistically, Dr. Joe may actually have a right to feel safe (though I think otherwise). But if such a right exists, that right was not considered important enough to be enshrined in the Constitution, and thus does not override those rights which were. And, of course, there is still the possibility that there is no such right; it's a debatable point.
The existence of the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, on the other hand, is not debatable - it's spelled out right there in the 4th Amendment.