Can't get behind going after these people personally, in spite of the fact that I hate what they do. Peace out.

Well, Bear, although I was willing last night (though too tired to write) to answer your question:

...after seeing your threat of DHS harassment for perfectly legal speech, out of an abundance of caution I now decline. If you were hoping for death threats, it wasn't that juicy. More along the lines of the civilian who videoed Rodney King (who may, or may not, have been going 104mph in a 130hp car with 600lb of passengers before the well-known film of his beating while handcuffed begins) even if instructed to stop. But I do have a question for you:

Are there any laws you would not obey?

One of the most serious duties of a U.S. military officer is to abstain from carrying out an unlawful order: very rarely used, but vital in support of his/her oath to preserve the essence of the nation s/he serves, the Constitution.

1) Had you been in ANY state in 1858, would you return an escaped slave to bondage?
2) Had you been a LEO on the West Coast in 1942, would you forcibly deport innocent U.S. citizens from their homes and confiscate their property?
3) Had you been under Lt. Calley's command in 1968, would you follow direct orders to rape, torture and kill unarmed civilians?
4) Had you been on the admissions committee of a U.S. medical school with a Jewish quota in 1948, would you "out" a qualified applicant the rest of the board wasn't aware was Jewish?

Non-violent resistance starts with romantic revolutionary talk, too—a lot of it is concept-testing. Nonviolence is always the preferable path, but in extreme situations it's ineffective (Cambodia?) or takes too much time. I would love to believe nonviolent resistance could eliminate the rape of eight-year-olds in Darfur, but waiting for that to end as long as Gandhi did to free India is untenable. I value proceeding with the least violence necessary, but assume it would involve at minimum threat of deadly force.

The amputee mom's account of having her medical device removed and contaminated while her four-year-old was repeatedly frisked, shouted at and separated from her until he was sobbing isn't equal to the Darfur atrocities, but it's frighteningly far onto the slippery slope.

It depends how bad things get. Do you think all the Senators and Representatives who gladly voted in the Patriot Act really envisioned routine strip searches and genital groping? I don't, but few of the current crop appear to have the will to fix it, either.

I've given considerable time writing emails and letters, to no apparent effect. Driven four 2000-mi RTs since November, including one in a blizzard that would have been cheaper, faster and safer as air travel. When I do fly, I give up many extra hours to prepare to resist harassment. For some trips I'm ready to call the DY...T bluff, but can't/won't give up certain family responsibilities that require quick transit. I risk financial loss, legal problems and debilitating emotional distress by consistently standing up to the system within the law.

How far I'd go in an extreme situation where someone was being hurt, I don't think I'll know unless it happens. I've been attacked by a patient twice my size whom I was ethically bound not to harm, and threatened with a Bowie knife by a virtual stranger. I'm still here; maybe what I did worked, maybe I was just lucky. But I doubt anyone without conflict training and substantial experience (infantry, street cop) can know ahead of time.

:D

That's okay, some of the ones who worry you probably aren't sure either.

There is a lot of letting-off-steam because the forum is what it is: venting to folks who never travel, have no need or no interest is far less satisfying than among compatriots who understand. TS&S is more like a pub than an office. What's "over the top" expression for some, is not so for others: we have considerable differences of age, culture, profession, etc. Hearing both LEOs and medical people vent informally has raised my shock threshold pretty high. However I really don't see much advocacy for breaking the law "out of innate righteousness" except from one or two claimed TSOs. Some of what's said here is very serious, but not all.

Not to hijack this thread to OMNI, but if FTers are exactly correct about the dangers TSA presents, we still will never be perfect and the "enemy" will never be totally wrong. US troops who liberated Dachau were members of a racially segregated army! The Black Panthers really fed thousands of school kids nourishing breakfasts, along with their crimes petty and serious. Cuba has better health care than we do but murders dissidents. Hamas provides schoolbooks and hospitals, in addition to kidnapping and killing people. (If you have trouble taking the measure of this, try listening to Terry Waite. I heard him speak in 2002: he was one of the first public figures to see clearly and speak frankly about where the WoT could lead us.)

To toss in my two cents, I was told by a lawyer years ago that I'd better not attempt a rescue impulsively because if any harm results from my futile attempt, I'd be liable, no matter how noble my intention. Good luck to those who think society will regard them as a hero regardless of outcome. You might be in for a shock. Like doctors, your first mandate must be "do no harm".

Way off topic and rude beyond the usual
 

I've deleted several posts for rude behavior, quoting those rude posts and general off-topic nastiness. If you have something to add about the original topic, feel free but my guess is that discussion has been exhausted.

thanks

squeakr

co mod TS/S

This is where "good samaritan" laws come in, which are too frequently (thanks to Seinfeld) confused with the "duty to rescue" I mentioned above. In a state with GS laws, you are protected from liability for trying earnestly to rescue someone in need. The lawyer may well have been right if it was in a state which had no GS laws or which hadn't passed them yet, but you might want to re-check now that some time has gone by, as your lawyer may have some good news for you. They really are a great idea as they enable people to help each other without forcing them to do so

Long since :( .

That one biblical story really controls people's minds. I certainly think there are times and places for the response, but like all biblical stories, applied with no judgment across the board, they can lead to disasters. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. And good intentions are no substitute for good thinking. Anyone who tries to give medical aid without calling 911 immediately could be conjuring up a tragedy. I have no objection to people who reach out to strangers, but if your reaching out kills someone, I lose my sympathy. Most of us also remember Kitty Genovese (google it if you don't). In that case, simple phone calls would have led to a different outcome. But our brain is not there to be ignored (yeh, politics suggests otherwise). A few seconds of using it can also make a huge difference.

Oh, I definitely agree. The accomplishment GS laws can be credited with is shifting people's mentality away from "I could be sued, I won't even try" to at least thinking (for those who are willing to think) about whether they can help.

I'm no fan of basing legislation on religious parables but at least in this case, there's some amount of benefit that can be derived from it.

The parable deals with what is virtue, public displays of piety or social conscience. So it has a valid basic lesson. But when people are not into thinking, they just throw it out there as "obvious justification" for anything. I'm sure that spiritual masters never intend their lessons to be applied that way.

I didn't read this whole thread but did anyone ever find out what exactly bart is refering to here. What is the worst case screening he's talking about and does it happen now or is he just fantasizing about having his way with passengers in new ways.

It's covered (sort of) elsewhere.

It is definitely 'private room', I believe he's posted that relatively few TSOs are trained to do it, I think he's mentioned (or someone has) serious reports filed and yes, from what he doesn't say, it sounds like it is pretty much an 'anything goes' search. He doesn't say, but I wouldn't be surprised if you are not allowed a witness for this type of search.

This topic serves little purpose other than to perpetuate acrimony. Time to close it and get back to travel relevant threads.

---------
essxjay
TS/S moderator