A pat down that ended my wife up in the ER
Aug 9, 2012, 2:12 pm
#136
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 68,930
Your argument is that she and a percentage of other American's should not fly because the current procedures could cause emotional unrest. My argument is that the procedures should be modified to not necessarily need to exclude a minority population.
So should my wife not be able to go on vacations with me that require flying because she was forcibly raped against her will and is still recovering? Or should there be better intelligence (profiling, background checks) and less invasive ways of admitting someone beyond the checkpoint? I don't think "less invasive" is purely technical (backscatter, MMW, metal detector, etc.) - I think it could also include training agents to be aware that not everyone is wired equally.
So should my wife not be able to go on vacations with me that require flying because she was forcibly raped against her will and is still recovering? Or should there be better intelligence (profiling, background checks) and less invasive ways of admitting someone beyond the checkpoint? I don't think "less invasive" is purely technical (backscatter, MMW, metal detector, etc.) - I think it could also include training agents to be aware that not everyone is wired equally.
You will find numerous posts by me on TSS contending that the TSA should follow the Israeli model and look for terrorists, not for weapons. You will also find numerous posts from other members saying that what I am arguing for is racist.
By all means, try to get the system changed. I doubt you will be successful but I will be very happy to be proven wrong.
In the meantime, however, your wife remains at risk every time she goes into an airport -- and that is not something which she should put herself through.
Aug 9, 2012, 2:12 pm
#137
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,145
At least, there is a correlation between a fear of heights and flying. The correlation between fear of having a stranger grab your breasts or poke you in the genitals and flying....doesn't exist.
Aug 9, 2012, 2:14 pm
#138
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 68,930
There is a definite correlation between going through the TSA checkpoint (which is unavoidable in US airports) and having a stranger touch your breasts or genitals.
Aug 9, 2012, 2:15 pm
#139
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston
Programs: CO Platinum
Posts: 283
Gotta love when people can't refute an actual point or respond to a question and instead resort to personal attacks.
Just because people say they have the "right" to fly doesn't actually mean they have the right to fly.
To answer your question, the government has the right to restrict free travel when it suits them.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_the_US...ional_security
Sources, several well cited laws that allow the government the right to restrict your travel.
Your turn, tell me how citizens have the "RIGHT" to Fly and how it's not a privilege but a right given to ALL citizens.
I can't wait for your response, this should be good.
Before attacking others you might want to learn the difference between a Right and a Privilege.
Just because people say they have the "right" to fly doesn't actually mean they have the right to fly.
To answer your question, the government has the right to restrict free travel when it suits them.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_the_US...ional_security
Sources, several well cited laws that allow the government the right to restrict your travel.
Your turn, tell me how citizens have the "RIGHT" to Fly and how it's not a privilege but a right given to ALL citizens.
I can't wait for your response, this should be good.
Before attacking others you might want to learn the difference between a Right and a Privilege.
I think other's on this thread have already provided enough information to refute your contextually ridiculous demand to "show you" where it says there is right to fly.
I didn't resort to a personal attack--sorry if you took it as such. But, apparently by your mode of thought you do not have a "right" to post on the internet (no matter how intelligent or not) because it does not say so in the Constitution. Obviously, this right is contrued by the Constitution through the prohibition of governmental restrictions. This is analagous to how we actually do have a "right" to fly.
And case law does confirm this.
This is not to say that these rights are absolute, but they are rights notheless.
Meanwhile, have fun searching for other words that don't exist in the constitution such as breathe, sleep, walk, eat. Lots of things that you have a "right" to do--these are just not explicitly enumerated.
Aug 9, 2012, 2:18 pm
#140
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,129
Aug 9, 2012, 2:19 pm
#141
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,145
There is no option but to experience heights when you fly. The same is not true with being groped at the checkpoint.
Aug 9, 2012, 2:46 pm
#142
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,332
Tell me where the Constitution says we have a right to fly.
Methinks you need to go back to school if you seriously believe that it's a fundamental RIGHT for people to fly.
If so, it's a right only the "rich" are able to engage in because of airfare prices.
By your logic we should offer free airfare for everyone because it's a RIGHT and not a privilege.
The thing is, if the TSA IS violating your rights, then you clearly have recourse right? Millions of travelers have determined that the TSA aren't violating rights or if they are it's in isolated incidents.
If people want to give up their rights for the ability to fly then that's their choice, the day people defend their "rights" is the day the airports sit empty.
The patdown didn't land the wife in the ER, the pills she took along with the stressful situation landed her in the ER. Any number of events could trigger these types of situations, that doesn't mean her rights were violated(if they were consult a lawyer) and that doesn't mean the TSA is responsible for the ER bill.
Methinks you need to go back to school if you seriously believe that it's a fundamental RIGHT for people to fly.
If so, it's a right only the "rich" are able to engage in because of airfare prices.
By your logic we should offer free airfare for everyone because it's a RIGHT and not a privilege.
The thing is, if the TSA IS violating your rights, then you clearly have recourse right? Millions of travelers have determined that the TSA aren't violating rights or if they are it's in isolated incidents.
If people want to give up their rights for the ability to fly then that's their choice, the day people defend their "rights" is the day the airports sit empty.
The patdown didn't land the wife in the ER, the pills she took along with the stressful situation landed her in the ER. Any number of events could trigger these types of situations, that doesn't mean her rights were violated(if they were consult a lawyer) and that doesn't mean the TSA is responsible for the ER bill.
Not to mention the 10th Amendment:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Methinks you need to go back to school and learn what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are all about. They don't GRANT you rights - they LIMIT the government's ability to infringe upon rights that every human being is born with.
Where in the Constitution does it say that the government has a right to view my naked body, touch my genitals, or irradiate my skin as a condition of free travel? Nowhere - but it does state very clearly (in the 4th Amendment) that the government is prohibited from subjecting anyone to unreasonable search and siezure without warrant or probable cause.
I consider a government actor touching my testicles without a warrant or probable cause to be an extremely unreasonable search. Or siezure, but that varies according to the individual TSO's technique.
Aug 9, 2012, 2:59 pm
#143
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,129
The Privileges and Immunities clause (Article 4, Section 2, Clause 1) and upheld repeatedly by the US Supreme Court (U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969)), estalishes the peoples' right to unobstructed interstate travel.
And that, of course.
Not to mention the 10th Amendment:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Methinks you need to go back to school and learn what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are all about. They don't GRANT you rights - they LIMIT the government's ability to infringe upon rights that every human being is born with.
Where in the Constitution does it say that the government has a right to view my naked body, touch my genitals, or irradiate my skin as a condition of free travel? Nowhere - but it does state very clearly (in the 4th Amendment) that the government is prohibited from subjecting anyone to unreasonable search and siezure without warrant or probable cause.
I consider a government actor touching my testicles without a warrant or probable cause to be an extremely unreasonable search. Or siezure, but that varies according to the individual TSO's technique.
And that, of course.
Not to mention the 10th Amendment:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Methinks you need to go back to school and learn what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are all about. They don't GRANT you rights - they LIMIT the government's ability to infringe upon rights that every human being is born with.
Where in the Constitution does it say that the government has a right to view my naked body, touch my genitals, or irradiate my skin as a condition of free travel? Nowhere - but it does state very clearly (in the 4th Amendment) that the government is prohibited from subjecting anyone to unreasonable search and siezure without warrant or probable cause.
I consider a government actor touching my testicles without a warrant or probable cause to be an extremely unreasonable search. Or siezure, but that varies according to the individual TSO's technique.
Aug 9, 2012, 3:19 pm
#144
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Your wife, unfortunately, is not in a position to deal with what "should be" but rather with what "is".
You will find numerous posts by me on TSS contending that the TSA should follow the Israeli model and look for terrorists, not for weapons. You will also find numerous posts from other members saying that what I am arguing for is racist.
You will find numerous posts by me on TSS contending that the TSA should follow the Israeli model and look for terrorists, not for weapons. You will also find numerous posts from other members saying that what I am arguing for is racist.
ROTFLOL Your position invites more "security" theater than there already is, even if some may try to claim otherwise.There aren't that many non-state actor terrorists in the US that the TSA has a chance of even catching; and the few terrorists known to have been at airports with a TSA presence have been cleared to fly by the TSA; and some have been missed or eventually cleared (to fly) by the Israeli/Israeli-trained voodoo "security" personnel on the supposed hunt for terrorists rather than on the hunt merely for prohibited items.
Aug 9, 2012, 3:25 pm
#145
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Hilton Diamond, IHG Spire Ambassador, Radisson Gold, Hyatt Discoverist
Posts: 3,623
I don't know what the TSA did wrong in this story. I am sympathetic to the situation of the woman described in the original post, but we can't exempt people from security screening just because they have mental health issues or an aversion to airport security measures. TSA used a female officer to perform the pat down and it seems that the officer performed that pat down properly.
Aug 9, 2012, 3:49 pm
#146
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,129
I don't know what the TSA did wrong in this story. I am sympathetic to the situation of the woman described in the original post, but we can't exempt people from security screening just because they have mental health issues or an aversion to airport security measures. TSA used a female officer to perform the pat down and it seems that the officer performed that pat down properly.
No one should get a pat down unless cause can be shown to require that act. The crotch groping, breast groping, hands in the pants TSA pat down exceeds the limited administrative search TSA is authorized to conduct.
Aug 9, 2012, 4:24 pm
#147
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,425
Criminality aside, nobody with reason would think these things reasonable at the airport, if no cause for them were given by a passenger.
The weird need to feel people up at random or because machines used have a greater than 50% error rate, or ETD swabs have a 100% error rate.
Spare me the assertion that the Israeli's do it better. You mean like forcing people to log into their private emails, peeking at them, like actually and physically strip searching reporters from the New York Times as a punitive measure and putting them on the next flight back to New York because of unfavorable articles? Yeah, lets do security just like the Israelis. Heaven help you if you're of Arab descent.
Aug 9, 2012, 4:27 pm
#148
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Hilton Diamond, IHG Spire Ambassador, Radisson Gold, Hyatt Discoverist
Posts: 3,623
TSA exempts all sorts of people, pilots, aircrew, airport workers, TSA employees, some members of congress, and I am sure there are others.
No one should get a pat down unless cause can be shown to require that act. The crotch groping, breast groping, hands in the pants TSA pat down exceeds the limited administrative search TSA is authorized to conduct.
No one should get a pat down unless cause can be shown to require that act. The crotch groping, breast groping, hands in the pants TSA pat down exceeds the limited administrative search TSA is authorized to conduct.
Aug 9, 2012, 4:36 pm
#149
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Omaha, NE, USA
Posts: 1,424
You post a classic example of "if it didn't happen to me, it must not be a real problem."
Aug 9, 2012, 4:37 pm
#150
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
I don't know what the TSA did wrong in this story. I am sympathetic to the situation of the woman described in the original post, but we can't exempt people from security screening just because they have mental health issues or an aversion to airport security measures. TSA used a female officer to perform the pat down and it seems that the officer performed that pat down properly.
The screening itself may have been performed properly, in a literal sense. But the passenger certainly wasn't treated with the "respect and care" that are part of TSA's stated values.