Which laws, pray tell? I would appreciate a cite to the USC/USCA chapter and statute.

Not at all. But in order for them to be known, this fact must be proven. The way we do that, in the United States of America, as it has been since the founding of the Republic, is to arrest them, take them before a judge and jury, and argue the evidence. If the judge and jury believes the evidence, then they issue a verdict. The terrorist is then known, has been able to argue his/her case and the government likewise. Then and ONLY then should someone not be allowed to fly on commercial aircraft.


I'll bet they don't.


There is. It's me. I'm the pilot, I know the passengers, they are my a) friends, b) my family c) my business associates. No one gets on my airplane without me knowing who they are, very well.

Scheduled air carrier traffic is another matter. There the passengers are not a.) my friends, b.) my family, c)my business associates. Anyone who has the price of a ticket can board. A good friend who is a now retired Captain for one of the majors, who witnessed the attacks of the trade center while on approach to LGA as captain of an B-747-400 told me shortly afterwards, that no one would get into his cockpit and anyone trying would get the crash axe in the forehead before they could commandeer his airplane.

Ron, many of your TSO colleagues likely own Chevy 2500 pick up trucks. The LASP targets this sized class of airplanes. Sure there must be something on board these large pickup trucks that make it impossible for them to be used as weapons. Some transponder, radar, pedestrian avoidance system or magic wand. Otherwise, I think the TSA should require them to enter a request for permission for the owner to drive the truck, have a background check, be fingerprinted, have a passenger manifest submitted and approved against the nebulous "no travel" list, have the cargo manifest be cleared by a TSA officer dispatched to your garage to be TSA inspected prior to a trip to Home Depot to pick up wallboard. And again, before you leave the Home Depot parking lot.

That is what the LASP and its close cousin, the eAPIS program does. Someone can be denied a trip, even on a return leg, because in the feeble attempt at justification in the NRPM "you may no know that one of your family members is on the no-fly list."

I guarantee you that more damage can be done with a large pickup truck than a 12,500 aircraft which has a useful load of maybe 2000 pounds. I can certainly do much more damage with a 12,500 pound boat than I can with an airplane, should I so desire.

If they are "known" terrorists, then why are they walking around free anyway? A terrorist is one who has executed a terrorist crime, so they would be arrested if we know where they are. There is something called due process that you apparently are completely ignorant about.

Not that it matters. Media investigators have confirmed that known terrorists are not on TSA's watch or no-fly list. As my case and the case of that CNN reporter clearly show, the lists aren't about protecting air passengers -- they are about punishing people for activities supposedly protected by the First Amendment.

[In]Secure Flight merely expands that into permission to travel, just like the old Soviet Union. It's not about safety, it's about control. You freedom of speech exists only so far as you express agreement with the government. Fail to toe that line, and you're either a terrorist (Bush) or a racist (Obama). In either event, expect lots of hassle when you travel.

Tried to get a job in the private sector lately? The majority of employers - and nearly ALL large employers - do background checks on prospective employees. If you have a blemish (criminal record) you're out.

And in some industries, one mistake and you're done.

Same thing that keeps a truck from being used as a weapon. Or keeps a SAM from being used against an airliner.

If I read you right, you think TSA should have total control of everything that moves. Too bad we have that pesky constitution, isn't it?

Folks TSORon is nothing but a troll. I question even if he works for TSA in any capacity based on remarks that show confusion on several points. Worked at a large that was suddenly a small airport, very questionable remarks about security matters and the list could continue for some time.

I suggest that his postings should be read for the comedic content but otherwise just ignored.

I just spent the last 8 years of my life disagreeing with Bush's government on everything. Now we have Obama and Rush Limbaugh and his armies of listeners are taking over my role.

So tell me where you are hibernating that you can make the above statement? And do people here really buy that stunning generality?

So where are you published?

If I live to be 150, I will never understand how it is that we manage to get > 200,000 paramedics and EMT's to follow the same basic set of rules nationwide, and TSA can't get 45,000 TSO's to decide whether the shoes go on the belt or in the bin.

That's right. The Constitution is a terrible impediment to the sort of total control that would keep us safe. Don't you want to be safe? Sheesh! :p

Bruce

Ron, if you're going to defend the War on Water, you'll have to defend ALL the characteristics of one of these two liquid explosives.

There are two explosives under discussion, and which ever one you are discussing has to have ALL of these characteristics.

1. The components are safe to transport, individually cannot be detected by explosives detection, are liquid, and can be combined easily and safely into an explosive using only facilities found on the other side of the TSA checkpoint.

-or-

2. The combined explosive is safe to transport, liquid, and cannot be detected by explosives detection.

Pay particular attention to the "undetectable" requirement.

Only at Hogwarts have we found potions with those qualities. If a Hogwarts graduate is coming through a TSA checkpoint I doubt that your security would be effective anyway, especially if he knows the Imperious curse.

Even better...

It's about this time of year that the laws state legislatures have passed and their governors have signed start kicking in and every single citizen in that state will be required to follow them or be subject to civil or criminal penalties.

Yet, we are supposed to just try to understand that coordinating a simple rule like all shoes in the bin or out of the bin is very, very, very difficult and we just need to be patient.

Why?

Issue the universal rule and those TSOs that either are too ignorant or lazy to follow the rule or simply refuse to follow the rule will be removed from their positions and replaced by people who can follow the rule.

Why does the TSA get a pass?

And I also quote:

"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. ... We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?"
--George Orwell, "1984"

real comforting huh? Welcome to Amerika comrade, and by the way we're shredding your constitution.

Whaddya want, liberty or security? The choice seems obvious enough! (Oh, wait, didn't Benjamin Franklin say something about that 200 years ago? Uh-oh.)

Bruce

Here? ROTFLMAO!!!!

A full blown, no holds barred, certified by the Pope, Miracle.

(Never happen)