![]() |
Logiic Optional
People of TSA or who support the operations don't seem capable of logic. Here's my question: If TSA had to go to court to get a warrant for the searches they are doing right now, what is the likelihood a judge would give them the warrant. Whree is the "probable cause" in any of these searches? Evidence is routinely thrown out of court for lack of it, yet TSA has ZERO probable cause for its searches and yet they search anyway. Which means they make a mockery out of our laws, which are in place to protect citizens from fishing expeditions.
The cliche about the Muslim world is "they hate our freedoms". Truth is that TSA is the global LEADER in hating our freedoms. |
And combined with unlawfully detaining people, and unlawful confiscation of property, and invasion of privacy, and interrogation without affording Miranda rights, all add up to just how UNAmerican the TSA truly is. Land of the FREE, my A$$.
|
Originally Posted by Pluma
(Post 16156203)
And combined with unlawfully detaining people, and unlawful confiscation of property, and invasion of privacy, and interrogation without affording Miranda rights, all add up to just how UNAmerican the TSA truly is. Land of the FREE, my A$$.
|
The question is moot as all of that applies to a criminal search. Go back to the basics: administrative search.
The above is not to say aspects of a criminal search do not come into play but one needs to ask the right questions otherwise it is a moot exercise. |
Originally Posted by FlyingUnderTheRadar
(Post 16156873)
The question is moot as all of that applies to a criminal search. Go back to the basics: administrative search.
The above is not to say aspects of a criminal search do not come into play but one needs to ask the right questions otherwise it is a moot exercise. |
Originally Posted by FlyingUnderTheRadar
(Post 16156873)
The question is moot as all of that applies to a criminal search. Go back to the basics: administrative search.
The above is not to say aspects of a criminal search do not come into play but one needs to ask the right questions otherwise it is a moot exercise. Lets call it what it is. When a TSA clerk asks you about the cash you are carrying, it has nothing to do with security, it is a fishing expedition that may lead to criminal charges. When TSA suspects you have illegal drugs, and conducts further searches to verify that in fact you do have illegal drugs, than that to me is a criminal search. The TSA can conduct these searches with immunity as they are not LEO's and are not bound by laws that are in place for criminal searches. So the TSA has the power to conduct criminal searches right up to the point where they call a LEO to make the arrest. |
Originally Posted by FlyingUnderTheRadar
(Post 16156873)
The question is moot as all of that applies to a criminal search. Go back to the basics: administrative search.
The above is not to say aspects of a criminal search do not come into play but one needs to ask the right questions otherwise it is a moot exercise. Fantastic. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by FlyingUnderTheRadar
(Post 16156873)
The question is moot as all of that applies to a criminal search. Go back to the basics: administrative search.
The above is not to say aspects of a criminal search do not come into play but one needs to ask the right questions otherwise it is a moot exercise. |
An administrative search by law can be NO MORE invasive than necessary to meet its goal. The stated goal of the TSA is to find WEI. Both the Nude-o-Scope and grope-a-citizen are far more invasive than necessary to detect WEI.
Asking how much cash you are carrying has nothing to do with WEI and therefore a TSO requiring you to respond to that question before allowing you to proceed into the gate area has exceeded their authority. A particular airport security screening search is constitutionally reasonable provided that it “is no more extensive nor intensive than necessary, in the light of current technology, to detect the presence of weapons or explosives [ ] [and] that it is confined in good faith to that purpose.” Davis, 482 F.2d at 913 |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:02 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.