Originally Posted by clrankin
Some of them do. Just as in every profession, there are some law enforcement officials and some TSA folks that wake up every morning and thank God that they can go on another power trip. The biggest problem with this isn't necessarily that they can go on power trips (we all do from time to time), but that they are in a position when they do and can cause harm to others when they do.
Of course some of them do. But on this forum EVERY SINGLE LEO in the media is doing so. Everyone who carps so hard for the Bill of Rights does not give any LEO, TSA screener, etc. the presumption of innocence.
Ever. Not once.
This case is a textbook example of that. The TSA agent abused his/her power and overreacted. The TSA supervisor abused his/her power, probably with the thought of being hailed as the next "hero of the skies". And the LEO certainly abused his/her power in this whole thing. I certainly hope that all 3 people have sufficient negative marks placed on their records over this to severely stunt their career growth with their respective agencies. That is a start to a fitting punishment.
Again, textbook as written by the media. Not a court of law. Also, is it likely to be that ALL THREE people have that attitude? Just bad luck that the passenger caught the three people that think like this on one day all together?
I say Occam's Razor.
Ahhh, so I see... Just following orders, then? Whatever happened to thinking for one's self-- you know, exercising one or two brain cells every once in a while? If all these people do is act like robots, then perhaps we should come up with ways to replace them with robots. They would certainly be more efficient and less error prone than the average TSA screener.
Most people start out thinking for themselves. Then, as they get burned time and time again by our lovely citizenry for "not following policy" (sound familiar?) they decide, "To hell with it - I'm going strictly by the book" so as not to get in trouble again.
I hear often on this forum - "follow the policy". Now I hear "show discretion and think for yourself". Which is it?
I'm sure that as a LEO, part of your training has included ways to assess situations and use logic and reasoning when dealing with people and problems. The people involved in this situation ignored any such training and chose to act like fools instead of like people who were focused on providing true security to those flying that day. Shame on them.
See above.
There may be a world of difference, but there are also some commonalities:
- Both groups have secret directives and procedures that are kept from the public for "security" reasons
- Both groups are more concerned about appearance than substance
- Both groups have done a lousy job of public relations
- Both groups appear to believe that women are objects, and that it's OK to grope them
Here are some more:
-They all breath air.
-They were all born.
-They were all employed by the government.
Your list is not probative. We all share commonalities. They prove nothing, except that they are commonalites. They are not indictive of anything. Many of us in the world share commonalites with serial killers. Does that make us serial killers ourselves?
I am not necessarily an anti-police, anti-security person. I do, however, believe that limits-- strong limits-- need to be placed on what these types of agencies can and cannot do. I support catching terrorists and stopping killing, but not at the expense of liberty and privacy.
There have been few wars in our country that did not involve the limitation of freedoms in the short term. They have all be returned at wars end. If you do not want any infringement on liberty you will not be able to stop and prevent much killing. So long as you are willing to throw the dice that is fine. But remember you live in a republican democracy and your ideas are not everyone else's.....
In short: I may have nothing to hide, but that does not mean that I don't mind the government overstepping its limits. I may not be smuggling anything on board a plane, but that does not mean that I wouldn't hesitate to take appropriate action to stop a TSA agent from groping me during a secondary "search".
Such as?