JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
TSA Petition
- Thread Starter Douglas
- Start date
- Messages
- 3,053
- Reactions
- 1,934
It's public transportation. Just because you don't like the TSA rules/regs doesn't mean you should force anyone else to not follow them if it makes them feel safe. I really don't care about being searched and being disarmed to get on a plane. If you really do, I think there's probably an AMTRAK somewhere nearby that you can take.
The only thing I disagree with the TSA is that you can't just walk away when they decide search you. So if you decide "whoah, too much for me!" you can't just decide that you didn't need to see that Seahawks game that bad and leave. They detain you if you try to leave, stating that once they start the search process you can't leave until it is over. TSA aren't police, yet are granted authority to detain a citizen, even though they haven't committed a crime. Now THAT I have a problem with.
The rest of it is just PC liberal crap. If you don't like being pat searched or taking off your shoes then don't fly!
The only thing I disagree with the TSA is that you can't just walk away when they decide search you. So if you decide "whoah, too much for me!" you can't just decide that you didn't need to see that Seahawks game that bad and leave. They detain you if you try to leave, stating that once they start the search process you can't leave until it is over. TSA aren't police, yet are granted authority to detain a citizen, even though they haven't committed a crime. Now THAT I have a problem with.
The rest of it is just PC liberal crap. If you don't like being pat searched or taking off your shoes then don't fly!
- Messages
- 574
- Reactions
- 220
So because you don't mind it, why should others that DO mind it, have to be subjected to it? Just so you feel safe?
Maybe we could petition for 2 lines. One for those who don't want groped and their civil rights violated, and one line for those who do. It's not the "pat searched" or "taking off my shoes" that I really mind. It's the bullbubblegum like when they force a double-amputee Iraqi vet to remove his prostetic legs, which in turn forces his *** onto the FLOOR in front of everyone else. There are some power-hungry pieces of bubblegum in that job (sure, just like every job), but these ASVAB-waived, no-class morons take the cake.
- Messages
- 3,053
- Reactions
- 1,934
So because you don't like it others shouldn't feel safer from it?
I'm glad they made an amputee remove his prosthetic legs, inmates sneak stuff in prison all the time through people that are "inconvenient" to search (i.e. people in wheelchairs and false limbs).
Sorry to be the one to tell you but there are power hungry people in EVERY PROFESSION.
Unfortunately, I see some negative side-effects in your argument supporting the current practices of the TSA.
First of all, many would argue there is justifiable evidence that a large number of these TSA pat-downs and body-scans constitute a violation of an individual's fourth amendment rights.
But putting that aside, let's consider for a moment a possible ramification of your argument as it might apply to the rights of gun owners.
Since you claim these TSA practices are justified to make people feel 'safe', I could use the same line of reasoning to claim that open or concealed carry of firearms should be banned because the presence or assumed presence of firearms in public makes some people feel 'unsafe'.
To this, you might respond by saying that the second amendment to the constitution prevents this (since it 'gives' us the right to 'bear' arms) and that flying is not a 'right'.
And I would respond by saying that we are in grave danger if the only thing saving our 'inherent' right to keep and bear arms is a legal document acknowledging this 'inherent' right.
For let's suppose that at some point-in-time enough anti-gun legislators were elected so that the constitution could be amended to remove the second amendment from the bill of rights. Then there would be nothing to 'legally' prevent the government from banning all firearms on the premise that their presence in society makes some people feel 'unsafe'.
And even though most of us on this site would consider this to be a gross injustice on the part of government, there would be nothing we could do 'legally' to prevent it.
So if we are ever faced with this scenario, I expect you will recall your reasoning here, and you will gladly give up your firearms when the government is 'legally' able to ban them because doing so makes some people feel 'safe'.
First of all, many would argue there is justifiable evidence that a large number of these TSA pat-downs and body-scans constitute a violation of an individual's fourth amendment rights.
But putting that aside, let's consider for a moment a possible ramification of your argument as it might apply to the rights of gun owners.
Since you claim these TSA practices are justified to make people feel 'safe', I could use the same line of reasoning to claim that open or concealed carry of firearms should be banned because the presence or assumed presence of firearms in public makes some people feel 'unsafe'.
To this, you might respond by saying that the second amendment to the constitution prevents this (since it 'gives' us the right to 'bear' arms) and that flying is not a 'right'.
And I would respond by saying that we are in grave danger if the only thing saving our 'inherent' right to keep and bear arms is a legal document acknowledging this 'inherent' right.
For let's suppose that at some point-in-time enough anti-gun legislators were elected so that the constitution could be amended to remove the second amendment from the bill of rights. Then there would be nothing to 'legally' prevent the government from banning all firearms on the premise that their presence in society makes some people feel 'unsafe'.
And even though most of us on this site would consider this to be a gross injustice on the part of government, there would be nothing we could do 'legally' to prevent it.
So if we are ever faced with this scenario, I expect you will recall your reasoning here, and you will gladly give up your firearms when the government is 'legally' able to ban them because doing so makes some people feel 'safe'.
- Messages
- 781
- Reactions
- 321
My Mom has stopped flying. She is in her 70's and has a hip replacement. She has the Doctor's note. When she first got it years ago and would fly, she would of coarse set off the metal detector, show the note, get a simple swipe with that wand thingy and be on her way. Well now that is not good enough and gets the TSA Full Body Pat Down every time she flies. How does this make other people feel safe? Why are 70 year old women with hip replacements the target of TSA Full Body Pat Downs? When did this great country loose its ability to give freedom and target our elderly so some body else could "feel safer". How is this really making anything safer?
Bottom line if you don't like something then don't do it! And that is exactly what she has done. Hope someone is "safer feeling" because of it. I do believe there could be a better way than treating a 70 year old woman like a prison inmate. At least those that feel there is justification in doing so can feel good about taking one more "70 year old rat" out of the friendly skies.
Mike
Bottom line if you don't like something then don't do it! And that is exactly what she has done. Hope someone is "safer feeling" because of it. I do believe there could be a better way than treating a 70 year old woman like a prison inmate. At least those that feel there is justification in doing so can feel good about taking one more "70 year old rat" out of the friendly skies.
Mike
- Thread Starter
- #8
I have this experience that really sealed my feelings about the TSA.
I was flying a few years ago and when I picked up my duffle bag at baggage about a third of it's contents were spilled out on the carousel with a note stating that it had been searched. For all of you who are familiar with military duffle bags, they hadn't placed the three grommets over the wire before they closed it (poor description). It was embarrassing to be standing, in uniform, in the crowded baggage area re-stuffing skivvies, boots, uniforms, etc. back into my duffle bag because the TSA couldn't be respectful of my property. But that's just my personal feelings.
The "feeling" of being safe is not a metric to measure actual safety. If someone wants to kill large scores of people they don't need to be on a plane to do it.
I was flying a few years ago and when I picked up my duffle bag at baggage about a third of it's contents were spilled out on the carousel with a note stating that it had been searched. For all of you who are familiar with military duffle bags, they hadn't placed the three grommets over the wire before they closed it (poor description). It was embarrassing to be standing, in uniform, in the crowded baggage area re-stuffing skivvies, boots, uniforms, etc. back into my duffle bag because the TSA couldn't be respectful of my property. But that's just my personal feelings.
The "feeling" of being safe is not a metric to measure actual safety. If someone wants to kill large scores of people they don't need to be on a plane to do it.
- Messages
- 5,834
- Reactions
- 2,176
We should do exactly as Israel does. They profile and flying with them is no hassle. Oh no, we're too PC to do that so we search the little old ladies in wheelchairs.
No it's not.
It's PRIVATE transportation that sells seats to the public.
There is a huge difference.
- Messages
- 9,766
- Reactions
- 13,152
Fearful sheep get the government they deserve. Last time I checked no one has killed more innocent women and children than we have in the last decade all in the name of misguided revenge, lies, and fear.
- Messages
- 37,251
- Reactions
- 128,528
Cool, then based on that we should profile ALL Muslims, unshaven men with tattoos and body piercings, "man-ish" women (like Janet Napolitano), any and all "women" wearing veils over their face... does that fit in with what you're saying?
(seriously, I'm for the Israeli approach to this issue, because it works!)
- Messages
- 153
- Reactions
- 5
lmao!
Probably a complimentary cavity search for everyones name they see on the list
Probably a complimentary cavity search for everyones name they see on the list
- Messages
- 2,098
- Reactions
- 1,615
Anyone who thinks all that security theater actually makes travel safer are completely delusional.
Anyone who actually *feel* safer from getting groped or having their private parts exposed by a scanner should go see a psychiatrist instead of forcing their sick masochism on other travelers.
- Messages
- 2,098
- Reactions
- 1,615
Worse, it's private transportation that has been forcibly co-opted by the government.
For example, if United Airlines built their own airport in Chicago and tried to run their flights out of private property, without the TSA perverts interfering, that operation would last about 5 minutes before the government parasites shut it down.
- Messages
- 790
- Reactions
- 494
Lets not forget molesting little kids.
- Messages
- 1,948
- Reactions
- 3,072
Sidebar - Ya know its kinda funny - they say that they won't use profiling to conduct searches yet I know that for a few years they had a policy of "randomly" searching anyone with a common name based on the idea that someone using a fake identity that was trying to take over a flight would use a common name to avoid accidentally picking an uncommon name that had criminal activity associated with it. They figured that a thinking terrorist would use a name like Mike Smith, David Johnson, Carlos Hernandez, etc. as it would be much easier to explain away a warrant, etc. being someone else with the same name. During that time I was "randomly" searched every time I got on a flight. I confirmed this with a neighbor that worked for TSA at the time.
So they think its OK to profile by common name but not by people who might actually fit the common criteria of your average mid-eastern terrorist.
I also noticed back when they had the second screening at the gate that the people they selected were never (that I saw) people of mid-eastern decent.
IMHO I believe that they selected the people who they thought were least likely to object. If they want to call that effective screening then I would like my money back for the additional taxes/fees on all of my airline tickets since 9/11.
Maybe they should have 2 types of flights - one with all of the security screening stuff and another where anyone who has a concealed carry permit can carry on the flight - I'd be taking the second option.
So they think its OK to profile by common name but not by people who might actually fit the common criteria of your average mid-eastern terrorist.
I also noticed back when they had the second screening at the gate that the people they selected were never (that I saw) people of mid-eastern decent.
IMHO I believe that they selected the people who they thought were least likely to object. If they want to call that effective screening then I would like my money back for the additional taxes/fees on all of my airline tickets since 9/11.
Maybe they should have 2 types of flights - one with all of the security screening stuff and another where anyone who has a concealed carry permit can carry on the flight - I'd be taking the second option.
- Messages
- 37,251
- Reactions
- 128,528
Common names like... Muhamed-Muhamed? I always wondered why a muslim parent would name their kid with the same name for the first and middle name... must make them twice as holy, or something.
- Messages
- 735
- Reactions
- 108
Or twice as inbred....
Upcoming Events
New Classified Ads
-
Springfield Armory XD9 Mod.2 Sub-Compact 9mm Pistol
- Started by Howard Roark
- Replies: 0
-
CTC Illuminated Riflescope 4-16x50mm NIB- Started by Hoosier65
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-