Originally Posted by
mh3265a
A. No one is prohibited from driving. TSA has the power to prohibit citizens from flying.
YES - people are prohibited from driving. Think DUI or repeat other moving offsenses.
Only
after being convicted of an offense.
B. There is actual evidence to support the safety benefits of speed limits. There is no evidence that TSA procedures result in significantly improved safety.
There is evidence but it's NOT all public and for good reason.
Ah, yes, another TSA screener who presents "information" but won't back it up. Why should anyone believe you?
C. To restrict a citizen's rights, you must prove that it is crucial to do so and that the restriction will be minimized. TSA has yet to justify its existence (e.g., by providing independently verified cost-benefit analyses supporting TSA procedures), so there is no proof that TSA's power to prohibit flying is crucial to national security. Given that TSA indiscriminately requires (or has required) citizens' to turn over cupcakes, bottled water, and other innocuous items in order to fly, TSA's restrictions on citizens' right to travel by air are hardly minimized.
Flying is not explicit right in the Constitution and this is more than an individual rights issue than a collective good situation. This Tea Party ideology is absolutely crazy and uphelpful in our democracy.
As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#travel