TSA Checkpoints.
Nov 13, 2007 | 4:38 am
#106
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: South Florida
Programs: NW SE, AA GLD, Hilton Hhonors, Hertz GLD and Harrah's Diamond!
Posts: 344
Excellent post, Bart
Nov 13, 2007 | 7:59 am
#107
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,957
If there's anything that's a slow erosion of our freedoms, it's the laws that allow the police to stop us just to make sure we're wearing our seat belts. The way I see it, we have a God-given right to be stupid. And failure to wear a seat belt is certainly stupid. However, when a police officer stops a driver to make sure the driver is wearing a seat belt, a whole bunch of other things come into play. That officer then can justify, for self-protection, to conduct a search of the car and the driver. To me, this allows police officers an opportunity to "fish for evidence" they may not have originally thought was there. I see this as a slow erosion of our liberty and a gradual slide of government crossing the constitutional lines protecting us against unreasonable searches.
Nothing like this happens at a security checkpoint. Passengers voluntarily undergo the screening process. The screening process itself is designed to look for a specific list of prohibited items. The passenger is well aware of these prohibited items. Possession of these prohibited items result in either the passenger being given the opportunity to exit back into the public area to dispose of these items or the passenger abandoning these items at the checkpoint. No arrests, no detention. Only illegal items, that is to say, items that are specifically unlawful to possess either at any time (such as improvised explosive devices) or at a specific time (such as firearms in carry-on) carry the consequence of arrest and detention. And even so, the police officer must due process as defined by the courts in terms of rights warnings, arraignment, etc.
Nothing like this happens at a security checkpoint. Passengers voluntarily undergo the screening process. The screening process itself is designed to look for a specific list of prohibited items. The passenger is well aware of these prohibited items. Possession of these prohibited items result in either the passenger being given the opportunity to exit back into the public area to dispose of these items or the passenger abandoning these items at the checkpoint. No arrests, no detention. Only illegal items, that is to say, items that are specifically unlawful to possess either at any time (such as improvised explosive devices) or at a specific time (such as firearms in carry-on) carry the consequence of arrest and detention. And even so, the police officer must due process as defined by the courts in terms of rights warnings, arraignment, etc.
And I also remember a time before administrative fines were authorized for finding prohibited items. So even though it may not be illegal to possess outside of the checkpoint, the TSA still has the authority and does issue administrative fines. So yes, there has been an erosion of rights at the checkpoint similar to the seat belt law erosion.
Nov 13, 2007 | 8:17 am
#108
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Agreed.
People like to talk about history and then forget their own. Little things like Jim Crow laws, the Espionage and Sedation Acts in 1917 and 1918, Internment of Japanese-Americans, etc.
Compared to those the security checkpoint is piddly business.
People like to talk about history and then forget their own. Little things like Jim Crow laws, the Espionage and Sedation Acts in 1917 and 1918, Internment of Japanese-Americans, etc.
Compared to those the security checkpoint is piddly business.
Nov 13, 2007 | 8:27 am
#109
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
If there's anything that's a slow erosion of our freedoms, it's the laws that allow the police to stop us just to make sure we're wearing our seat belts. The way I see it, we have a God-given right to be stupid. And failure to wear a seat belt is certainly stupid. However, when a police officer stops a driver to make sure the driver is wearing a seat belt, a whole bunch of other things come into play. That officer then can justify, for self-protection, to conduct a search of the car and the driver. To me, this allows police officers an opportunity to "fish for evidence" they may not have originally thought was there. I see this as a slow erosion of our liberty and a gradual slide of government crossing the constitutional lines protecting us against unreasonable searches.
I got checked at a "click it or ticket" checkpoint in Utah once pulling into a Walmart. Cops were stopping people as they pulled in. I thought that was stupid too.
Nothing like this happens at a security checkpoint. Passengers voluntarily undergo the screening process. The screening process itself is designed to look for a specific list of prohibited items. The passenger is well aware of these prohibited items. Possession of these prohibited items result in either the passenger being given the opportunity to exit back into the public area to dispose of these items or the passenger abandoning these items at the checkpoint. No arrests, no detention. Only illegal items, that is to say, items that are specifically unlawful to possess either at any time (such as improvised explosive devices) or at a specific time (such as firearms in carry-on) carry the consequence of arrest and detention. And even so, the police officer must due process as defined by the courts in terms of rights warnings, arraignment, etc.
Nope, there's no erosion of freedom at the checkpoint. The people, that is the Voice of the People as represented in Congress, voted and agreed on establishing the TSA as the agency responsible for and conducting airport security.
) and rarely do we get anything more than a boilerplate response.Super
Nov 13, 2007 | 8:29 am
#110
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Doesn't mean it should be ignored, though, either. Now's the time to fix it while it still can be before it gets really out of control.
Nov 13, 2007 | 9:22 am
#111
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 966
When people are getting rounded up and being put into labor camps or when others are sent to special security lines because of their race/religion then your argument is valid. I'm Jewish and I am completely and utterly offended by your comparisons. I know your going to say that it's about the attitude but let's face it you can complain to your airline or the TSA directly. The people in you used in your comparison had no voice..
No, they aren't rounding people up here in America yet - and it may well (pray to the deity of your choice) never come to that. However, to continue the example despite your statement of offense, Nazi Germany didn't spring full-blown from Adolf's forehead one morning. There was an ever-growing trend of abuses by those 'legitimately' placed in power, each building on the one before, and people of all sorts there just let it happen.
Letting abuse of power occur unopposed ON ANY LEVEL just encourages expansion of that abuse.
Nov 13, 2007 | 10:50 am
#112
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: CO Plat, Priority Club Plat, HH Diamond, Avis First, Hertz #1Gold
Posts: 720
If there's anything that's a slow erosion of our freedoms, it's the laws that allow the police to stop us just to make sure we're wearing our seat belts. The way I see it, we have a God-given right to be stupid. And failure to wear a seat belt is certainly stupid. However, when a police officer stops a driver to make sure the driver is wearing a seat belt, a whole bunch of other things come into play. That officer then can justify, for self-protection, to conduct a search of the car and the driver. To me, this allows police officers an opportunity to "fish for evidence" they may not have originally thought was there. I see this as a slow erosion of our liberty and a gradual slide of government crossing the constitutional lines protecting us against unreasonable searches.
The screening process itself is designed to look for a specific list of prohibited items. The passenger is well aware of these prohibited items. Possession of these prohibited items result in either the passenger being given the opportunity to exit back into the public area to dispose of these items or the passenger abandoning these items at the checkpoint. No arrests, no detention.
Freedom of movement: Once you check in, you can't check out (Hotel California rule).
Freedom of assembly: Apparently, groups of "Middle Eastern" men can't fly without harassment.
Yes, Congress established your employing agency, but sometimes you have to be careful what you ask for.
Nov 13, 2007 | 11:14 am
#113
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Department of Homeland Sincerity
Programs: WN Platinum, UA 1k, AA EP, Marriott Plat
Posts: 12,319
When people are getting rounded up and being put into labor camps or when others are sent to special security lines because of their race/religion then your argument is valid. I'm Jewish and I am completely and utterly offended by your comparisons. I know your going to say that it's about the attitude but let's face it you can complain to your airline or the TSA directly. The people in you used in your comparison had no voice..
No, it was a slow, methodical and long process of people not caring about justice, freedom for all, and the authorities slowly eroding people's rights before this was possible.
When you forget that it was decades of indifference from the populace, and the slow erosion of people's rights, that led to the tragedies of the Holocaust, you have done your people a huge disfavor.
You allow yourself to be moved by arguments that "nothing equates to the Holocaust", which while true, it is also not irrelevant to note that the current erosion of freedoms to travel and rights to be free of abuses of government can lead to future tragedies.
It all happens one step at a time. Or will it be only valid once we are stripped of some important freedoms, such as the "redefinition of privacy" as recently noted by a government official, and once we are powerless to prevent tragedies, will you agree that the comparisons are somewhat valid?
I too have Jewish relatives, and I am offended that you're indifferent to the steps and attitudes that led to the Holocaust in the first place. That is very tragic in my view.
Nov 13, 2007 | 11:24 am
#114
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Department of Homeland Sincerity
Programs: WN Platinum, UA 1k, AA EP, Marriott Plat
Posts: 12,319
I truly don't see the comparison, and, no, it's not because I work for TSA.
If there's anything that's a slow erosion of our freedoms, it's the laws that allow the police to stop us just to make sure we're wearing our seat belts. The way I see it, we have a God-given right to be stupid. And failure to wear a seat belt is certainly stupid. However, when a police officer stops a driver to make sure the driver is wearing a seat belt, a whole bunch of other things come into play. That officer then can justify, for self-protection, to conduct a search of the car and the driver. To me, this allows police officers an opportunity to "fish for evidence" they may not have originally thought was there. I see this as a slow erosion of our liberty and a gradual slide of government crossing the constitutional lines protecting us against unreasonable searches.
Nothing like this happens at a security checkpoint. Passengers voluntarily undergo the screening process. The screening process itself is designed to look for a specific list of prohibited items. The passenger is well aware of these prohibited items. Possession of these prohibited items result in either the passenger being given the opportunity to exit back into the public area to dispose of these items or the passenger abandoning these items at the checkpoint. No arrests, no detention. Only illegal items, that is to say, items that are specifically unlawful to possess either at any time (such as improvised explosive devices) or at a specific time (such as firearms in carry-on) carry the consequence of arrest and detention. And even so, the police officer must due process as defined by the courts in terms of rights warnings, arraignment, etc.
Nope, there's no erosion of freedom at the checkpoint. The people, that is the Voice of the People as represented in Congress, voted and agreed on establishing the TSA as the agency responsible for and conducting airport security.
If you're going to make any comparisons with Nazi Germany, get it right.
If there's anything that's a slow erosion of our freedoms, it's the laws that allow the police to stop us just to make sure we're wearing our seat belts. The way I see it, we have a God-given right to be stupid. And failure to wear a seat belt is certainly stupid. However, when a police officer stops a driver to make sure the driver is wearing a seat belt, a whole bunch of other things come into play. That officer then can justify, for self-protection, to conduct a search of the car and the driver. To me, this allows police officers an opportunity to "fish for evidence" they may not have originally thought was there. I see this as a slow erosion of our liberty and a gradual slide of government crossing the constitutional lines protecting us against unreasonable searches.
Nothing like this happens at a security checkpoint. Passengers voluntarily undergo the screening process. The screening process itself is designed to look for a specific list of prohibited items. The passenger is well aware of these prohibited items. Possession of these prohibited items result in either the passenger being given the opportunity to exit back into the public area to dispose of these items or the passenger abandoning these items at the checkpoint. No arrests, no detention. Only illegal items, that is to say, items that are specifically unlawful to possess either at any time (such as improvised explosive devices) or at a specific time (such as firearms in carry-on) carry the consequence of arrest and detention. And even so, the police officer must due process as defined by the courts in terms of rights warnings, arraignment, etc.
Nope, there's no erosion of freedom at the checkpoint. The people, that is the Voice of the People as represented in Congress, voted and agreed on establishing the TSA as the agency responsible for and conducting airport security.
If you're going to make any comparisons with Nazi Germany, get it right.
Take the No Fly List for example - people are secretly added to the list without transparency to the process, and it can be hellish trying to get off the list.
Who knows what other lists are being compiled besides the No Fly List. Secret black lists, and applying to get off the list doesn't sound very American or Democratic to me.
The TSA arbitrarily applying "security" policies without a public examination process is also highly troubling. Very few other agencies can arbitrarily create and enact new policies that affect millions of people without any type of external review or process.
Take the no liquids ban for example - it was put in place in less than 24 hours, without solid evidence of any threats, and without any independent / external review from the public. As a result, millions of passengers were affected immediately. Tons of expensive liquids, products, and medicines were thrown away. Mothers were forced to give up baby milk, or to sample their own milk, sick people were deprived of important medication, etc etc.
This process is neither democratic nor accountable to the public.
When we see stuff like this, it goes to the heart of what America is NOT about.
Nov 13, 2007 | 12:41 pm
#115
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: Landry's President's Club, Amtrak Select,Marriott Silver, Taco Bell Fire, Awesomeness EXPLT
Posts: 23,931
Do you think it was suddenly, one day, someone woke up, and said "wow, let's send all the people to concentration camps!" and it became so?
No, it was a slow, methodical and long process of people not caring about justice, freedom for all, and the authorities slowly eroding people's rights before this was possible.
When you forget that it was decades of indifference from the populace, and the slow erosion of people's rights, that led to the tragedies of the Holocaust, you have done your people a huge disfavor.
You allow yourself to be moved by arguments that "nothing equates to the Holocaust", which while true, it is also not irrelevant to note that the current erosion of freedoms to travel and rights to be free of abuses of government can lead to future tragedies.
It all happens one step at a time. Or will it be only valid once we are stripped of some important freedoms, such as the "redefinition of privacy" as recently noted by a government official, and once we are powerless to prevent tragedies, will you agree that the comparisons are somewhat valid?
I too have Jewish relatives, and I am offended that you're indifferent to the steps and attitudes that led to the Holocaust in the first place. That is very tragic in my view.
No, it was a slow, methodical and long process of people not caring about justice, freedom for all, and the authorities slowly eroding people's rights before this was possible.
When you forget that it was decades of indifference from the populace, and the slow erosion of people's rights, that led to the tragedies of the Holocaust, you have done your people a huge disfavor.
You allow yourself to be moved by arguments that "nothing equates to the Holocaust", which while true, it is also not irrelevant to note that the current erosion of freedoms to travel and rights to be free of abuses of government can lead to future tragedies.
It all happens one step at a time. Or will it be only valid once we are stripped of some important freedoms, such as the "redefinition of privacy" as recently noted by a government official, and once we are powerless to prevent tragedies, will you agree that the comparisons are somewhat valid?
I too have Jewish relatives, and I am offended that you're indifferent to the steps and attitudes that led to the Holocaust in the first place. That is very tragic in my view.
Nov 13, 2007 | 1:02 pm
#116
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: South Florida
Programs: NW SE, AA GLD, Hilton Hhonors, Hertz GLD and Harrah's Diamond!
Posts: 344
Nov 13, 2007 | 2:34 pm
#117
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Department of Homeland Sincerity
Programs: WN Platinum, UA 1k, AA EP, Marriott Plat
Posts: 12,319
My own agenda? To ensure professional and courteous treatment of the flying public by the government, and to hold the government accountable for passenger abuse. That's a big bad agenda. Wow.
That is tragic and sad, your total lack of understanding of this issue, or your intentional avoidance of the real point being made.
Care to address the real issue - that a lack of accountability on government abuse, and an attitude of indifference can lead to tragedies, no matter how big or small?
Nov 13, 2007 | 2:38 pm
#118
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Department of Homeland Sincerity
Programs: WN Platinum, UA 1k, AA EP, Marriott Plat
Posts: 12,319
I put it right there, spoon feed it to your mouth, and you refuse to eat.
Nov 13, 2007 | 2:45 pm
#119
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: Landry's President's Club, Amtrak Select,Marriott Silver, Taco Bell Fire, Awesomeness EXPLT
Posts: 23,931
I have not used the word Hitler once in my post. You're the one putting the word out there.
My own agenda? To ensure professional and courteous treatment of the flying public by the government, and to hold the government accountable for passenger abuse. That's a big bad agenda. Wow.
That is tragic and sad, your total lack of understanding of this issue, or your intentional avoidance of the real point being made.
Care to address the real issue - that a lack of accountability on government abuse, and an attitude of indifference can lead to tragedies, no matter how big or small?
My own agenda? To ensure professional and courteous treatment of the flying public by the government, and to hold the government accountable for passenger abuse. That's a big bad agenda. Wow.
That is tragic and sad, your total lack of understanding of this issue, or your intentional avoidance of the real point being made.
Care to address the real issue - that a lack of accountability on government abuse, and an attitude of indifference can lead to tragedies, no matter how big or small?
Last edited by stockmanjr; Nov 13, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Nov 13, 2007 | 2:57 pm
#120
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Department of Homeland Sincerity
Programs: WN Platinum, UA 1k, AA EP, Marriott Plat
Posts: 12,319
I don't see how we're violating the TOS by discussing how human indifference and government abuse can lead to harm, but okay.