Who said anything about slavery?

I suggest your looking at this differently than the others. It's not that flying is a right. The point is... when you fly, you still have rights. The government questioning and searching you invades your privacy. What makes this an unconstitutional invasion of privacy and/or unreasonable search is based on many things. These include being necessary, effective, and the least intrusive method.

The name game is neither necessary nor effective (you said this yourself). Therefore, IMO, it is unconstitutional and worth the effort to protest against.

YMMV

I'm flying to get extra miles, might be a good response.:D

As another reason to see why this policy is idiotic, see
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/check...l#post17150329

I view it as an issue of integrity and honesty.

If I look up the information on what is required to enter the screening process I find simply that I need to submit my name and certain personal information to my airline. If that passes, they issue a boarding pass and I must present that to the TDC with a matching government issued ID.

There is no published requirement that I state my name.

There is no published requirement that I give them information about my travel plans.

They tell me what is required and then they change it at a point in which I am committed to the process and can only change my mind at a cost of time and likely money.

This is considered dishonest to the point that it is illegal in business to advertise the condition of a sale and then change those conditions when the customer arrives at the business.

If I enter into a verbal contract with a customer, and I operate on verbal contracts all of the time, and I make additional requirements of my customer to fulfill the contract at the point that I perform the service, I am in breach of my verbal contract and as such have operated unethically at best and illegally at worst.

If I were to call my regular car dealer, the one that has sold me the last six cars I have bought, and they price the car over the phone, if I were to show up at the dealer and they say, of course that is the price, but there are additional options that I will have to buy, what they have done is unethical and likely illegal.

Yet, that is what the TSA does. They state what is required and then they change it. This is unethical and illegal in most situations. Except for the TSA.

I don't see the right to wear a purple shirt listed in the Constitution. Yet I have that right.

I don't see the right to kiss my husband listed in the Constitution. Yet I have that right.

I don't see the right to hum while I clean the house listed in the Constitution. Yet...

The Bill of Rights, despite the name, is not a comprehensive list of all the rights afforded to persons in the US. It is, instead, a list of limitations upon government; not what citizens MAY do, but what the government must NOT do.

The part you're looking for, where it says you have a right to board a plane without saying your name, is here:

Once again, can you give an example? Can you dig up a story about someone who was given a secondary screening because they were unable (not unwilling) to say their name?

That's a fair argument, but does each individual citizen have the right to determine what spending is wasteful and what isn't? I think the road they are building in my city isn't necessary, so am I justified in interfering with the construction process?

I can. At SFO, I was unwilling to say my name out loud. I offered to write it down and was refused. I was whisked off for a pre-screening and more questions. I then went through the regular process, only to magically be randomly selected and screened again.

I told a story yesterday of a man being yelled at by TSA (he was deaf) for not saying his name. He was a pre-board and this fiasco delayed boarding for everyone for a couple of minutes. If it weren't for the sane passengers around this individual helping, he would surely have been publicly humiliated even more than he was. He wasn't being allow to board the plane without stating his name. I'm surprised he didn't get a field pat down.

I answered your question. Do you care to discuss the responses and questions put to you about rights and such?

Just answer the question. Picking a fight with TSA (whom I detest) at the airport is absolutely pointless, albeit satisfying. It really is a futile exercise singling yourself out for special attention. The battle is not fought at the airport, it needs to be fought outside it.

YES

You have the right to peacefully demonstrate against any waste, fraud, abuse, unjust act, etc. That's one of our rights too. @:-)

For example, roads are often built over people's property. The property owner's have a right and often an obligation to protest. They get their day in court like everyone else. Some sit idle by and let the government that can do no wrong do whatever it wants.

Where the lines are drawn between complaining, peaceful protest, interfering, and violent protest are hotly debated. YMM, of course, V, widely.

The battle didn't need to be fought in the back of the bus. Rosa could have simply voted for better representation. :rolleyes:

I'll answer the question. Resistance is not futile. I am a free person and will continue to speak out against what I see as government waste and unreasonable actions. The fact that they purposefully retaliate against people who speak their mind is proof that what they are doing is wrong. I do this so that they will notice. If they don't maybe someone around me will. A groundswell also starts with a few that see wrong and try to change it.

Interesting game. Tic tac toe. You want to play too? Just answer my question: How do you propose we stop this madness and what, precisely, have you done about it? The TSA would want you to "go away" and protest somewhere else. Why would you? Please explain.

Or tell him you're going there to meet his wife. "You know how she just loves the Chicago Ritz Carlton."

If we start the slippery slope of momma/wife jokes, we're going to need a new thread! :D

Resistance at the airport is totally futile. You make a point to yourself, maybe one or two others, and slow yourself down for self-satisfaction - if that is what you want then fair play to you. If the USA cannot, or does not know how to, get itself organized and work out where it needs to direct pressure then just suck it all up.