|
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Brian: Hey, Larry, I'll buy you a drink anywhere, anytime. No flying jokes from the peanut gallery please. Thanks for taking the time to sort out this whole mess of muddled thinking clearly and dispassionately. </font> Here's another vote for you to stick around, Brian. Just remember, every time you feel like banging your head against a wall after reading something here, there's someone on the other side of the argument likely doing the same thing. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif Mook ------------------ "Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." -- Thomas Jefferson |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Brian: Hey, Larry, I'll buy you a drink anywhere, anytime. No flying jokes from the peanut gallery please. Thanks for taking the time to sort out this whole mess of muddled thinking clearly and dispassionately. </font> But you know what? I think we'll have more people at our happy hour, don't you? |
Well, OUR "happy" hour won't be happy! How about 2 or 3 steps removed?
Bruce |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mdtony: I second that. Maybe we should have a "The TSA is not the Gestapo" happy hour or something someday. The folks who feel that the TSA is one step removed from Nazi Stormtroopers can have their own happy hour, and everyone will have fun. But you know what? I think we'll have more people at our happy hour, don't you?</font> Well, there goes the neighborhood! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif Welcome back to grade school |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mdtony: So, let's think this through. Allowing the TSA to look at information that the government already has would allow me to blow past the lines of folks who claim that airport security is a violation of our Constitutional rights -- despite the fact that the courts have said they are not? Sign me up.</font> Then it's going to score that information and you might get to breeze through security, or you might get a couple agents showing up at your doorstep looking to question you based on how all of your factors scored. d |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Doppy: the government is working on getting information...</font> I think that Tony is talking about something different, though. I agree with him that there's no reason not to proceed with a voluntary system which would allow participants reduced screening in exchanged for access to information necessary for pre-screening not unlike how the government evaluates and grants all of the various levels of security clearance. Not only would such a system reduce the hassles for the participants but it would reduce the congestion thereby speeding screening the process for the non-participants. |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by bdschobel: Well, OUR "happy" hour won't be happy! How about 2 or 3 steps removed?</font> |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Doppy: As I posted above, the government is working on getting information that it doesn't already have - credit reports, bank records, credit card bills, telephone bills - even what books you buy at the bookstore. Then it's going to score that information and you might get to breeze through security, or you might get a couple agents showing up at your doorstep looking to question you based on how all of your factors scored.</font> Furthermore, that is NOT what we are talking about here. We are talking about a voluntary trusted traveller card. That's a completely different thing, don't you think? Let's review what we're talking about here. We are talking about something where people VOLUNTARILY allow the government to do background checks on them in order to get a card that allows them to bypass security at the airport. There can be no claim of a civil rights violation because such disclosure is voluntary. John Ashcroft can issue a request for all people who come from Saudi Arabia to go to the front steps of the Capitol on their own dime to kiss his butt at high noon, and as long as that request is voluntary, there is no violation of civil rights there! [This message has been edited by mdtony (edited 11-27-2002).] |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mdtony: Actually, if you read the case law, you will find that the Second Amendment has not been applied to individual gun own ... </font> |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mdtony: If they determine that I've been donating millions of dollars to al Qaeda and buying books about jihad, then they should arrest me, because donating funds to a terrorist organization is a violation of the law. Of course, they already have access to those banking records, so what's new there?</font> No scoring system is ever going to be perfect, real threats will get through and people who are not a threat will get flagged. I simply don't want MY government showing up at my doorstep because they don't like what's on my reading list. <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Furthermore, that is NOT what we are talking about here. We are talking about a voluntary trusted traveller card. That's a completely different thing, don't you think? Let's review what we're talking about here. We are talking about something where people VOLUNTARILY allow the government to do background checks on them in order to get a card that allows them to bypass security at the airport. There can be no claim of a civil rights violation because such disclosure is voluntary.</font> If CAPPS II and the other system are carried out to the extent that the government is planning on, there won't be any more information for you to give to the government for a voluntary system, unless you agree to wear a videocamera and GPS device or something, because they'll already have all of your public and private information on hand. d |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by essxjay: Can you give me the citing? I'd like to run it by my pre-law advisor, a former D.A. and currently prof of my criminal procedures class. Thanks.</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The 1939 case U.S. v. Miller is the only modern case in which the Supreme Court has addressed this issue. A unanimous Court ruled that the Second Amendment must be interpreted as intending to guarantee the states' rights to maintain and train a militia. "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument," the Court said. In subsequent years, the Court has refused to address the issue. It routinely denies cert. to almost all Second Amendment cases. In 1983, for example, it let stand a 7th Circuit decision upholding an ordinance in Morton Grove, Illinois, which banned possession of handguns within its borders. The case, Quilici v. Morton Grove 695 F.2d 261 (7th Cir. 1982), cert. denied 464 U.S. 863 (1983), is considered by many to be the most important modern gun control case. </font> |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Doppy: My point is that they're already proceeding with the INVOLUNTARY system where they're going to be feeding CAPPS II information about where you go, what you do and how you spend your money. If CAPPS II and the other system are carried out to the extent that the government is planning on, there won't be any more information for you to give to the government for a voluntary system, unless you agree to wear a videocamera and GPS device or something, because they'll already have all of your public and private information on hand.</font> It's all public information. If you think your credit report, for example, is private, guess again. You don't want to know how many times it's been sold, and you don't want to know how easy it is to get a copy of that. I also think that the courts will turn down the inevitable challenges to using these records for CAPPS II. I think they will hold that flying, like driving, is a privilege, not a right, and that you must consent to certain things in order to do it. I am not worried about it. |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mdtony: I am looking at the things that CAPPS II will be looking at, and they are all public records. We're talking about criminal records from the FBI, records from your state MVA, records of deadbeat parents, and so on.</font> http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...ML/007790.html If you take a look at what I posted towards the bottom of that thread, you'll see a couple news stories and the TSA's report to Congress specifically saying that they're trying to get information from "private sector sources." They no longer need a warrant to get your bank, phone or credit card records; other private sector sources will likely include keeping a your complete travel history in a database. I'm fine with them using public information, but that's really not what they're going after. I doubt any of the 9/11 terrorists were deadbeat parents or had prior arrests for terrorism that would flag them. That's why taking away our privacy and getting at those more intimate details about you are so important. d |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Doppy: That's why taking away our privacy and getting at those more intimate details about you are so important.</font> |
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mdtony: You already have zero privacy, so just deal with it. Your information is bought and sold dozens of times a day. The war is already over.</font> What a great solution to all of our problems. I hope that people like you are the first to get arrested or detained for having a high "score," while some of us are working to protect your freedom. d |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:21 pm. |
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.