It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Searched and detained without cause, how would you feel?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Thanks for the acknowledgement. And, you are right as well. But, like I said , it does vary from state to state, area to area as to what your rights are.

As regards Miranda Rights: The police do NOT always have to give you your Miranda warning. It only applies in direct questioning (again check local your local standards) . That is, if you are arrested/detained and you make spontaneous admissions without prompting, that information can still be used against you. Let's say you are pulled over (for whatever) and the cop asks you for license and registration and proof of insurance. You, being three-sheets-to-the-wind, blurt out "I know I missed that red light but that's because I drank three bottles of vodka tonight!" That statement stands as admissible. No Miranda is required. That gives the cop every opportunity to arrest you. The OP makes some compelling statements but again, the entirety of the circumstances is what counts. What he/she was doing and when and where and how: all those things matter.




posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Now it's my turn. You too are absolutely right. Homeland Security and FAA have almost complete control over what goes on in the airport terminals and carriers control their planes.

There are buses, trains and taxis with less stringent standards.

On certain routes I flew for business, my clients paid for CHARTERS! (It was actually quicker and cheaper, by the way-no stops, fewer hours billed just for traveling, fewer overnight stays)

Star for being so quick and so cool.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
I live in CALI. This has been going on for 10 years here. Most of the time, if I was pulled over for a traffic violation, police have acted like I had committed a crime. EXTREMELY impolite, disrespectful etc. I drive 30k mile a year or more, so I have gotten a few tickets. I was dropping a check off at a night depository once on my way to work at 4:30 am when I was ambushed by 4 police cars, removed from my truck at gunpoint, and was told I fit the description of a recent burglary in the area. My photo was taken, photos of my vehicle, I was cuffed and in the car for 30 minutes before being let go. I SAY BS, they didn't know about the depository (property management co...I was dropping of the rent) and assumed I was up to no good.
The problem is that people (just like some here) are ready to accept this sort of thing because its for all of our "security". The attitude that this sort of garbage is acceptable is proof that the USA will get what it deserves...a loss of liberty in exchange for the delusion of security...

[edit on 29-1-2009 by odd1out]



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by alyosha1981
 



Excellent post and telling practical experience. My father, three uncles and two cousins are or have been in law enforcement of one sort or another. Every one of them was professional and respected by their friends, neighbors and peers.

I've also known and seen "bad" cops; but, as you said, there are bad plumbers, librarians, and others in every field. Sometimes, you can ask for trouble, too. Maybe "bad" ATS members, but who am I to say?

star

deny ignorance



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by odd1out
 


Or, we could just fire all the cops, or disarm them and take away their radios and cars.

It's a trade-off we have to make.

Which would you really prefer for your family and friends and neighbors and property and businesses (I'm sure you can take care of your own self just fine)?

deny ignorance



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Most of what you have seen is towns making money! This has been getting worse all over the country.
I had this happen to me. I was pulled over at where my Son lives more times in three months than I have ever been pulled over in my whole driving life.

And that is quite a few years of driving.
I found a fix. I filed suite and I have every time they pulled me over for nothing. It got so bad in town for people that they would pull someone over and spend ten minutes walking around the car looking for anything they could find to right a ticket. And while calling to try to find a warrant for ones arrest . One man got a ticket for the pressure cracks around the screw in his tail light , factory issue not his.


People are fighting radar tickets that they got that an officer said he caught them speeding three miles over the speed limit and getting the radar shoot at over four city blocks away with traffic. Needless to say they are getting thrown out but the people had to pay for lawyer that cost money. The tickets would be less to pay but it is still not right.
Not every town is doing this of course but they are growing in number around the U.S.
We as a people are just going to have to all start saying no! And it will work. Yes it will not be easy but if everyone fills the courts up with suites then we will get this to stop.

I can only wonder what is going on out on the west coast where the states can not pay for anything as we are hearing. If it is not started there I am sure it will as here .



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


Thanks jdub, I'm just trying to point out that the experiences of some should not cloud the perception of all. I can't say I feel bad when I see reports of people being "mistreated" by police right off the bat because I was not there and I do not know the whole situation. I do know however that countless police officers have killed in the line of duty and my hearts go uot to them and their families.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by odd1out
I live in CALI. This has been going on for 10 years here. Most of the time, if I was pulled over for a traffic violation, police have acted like I had committed a crime. EXTREMELY impolite, disrespectful etc. I drive 30k mile a year or more, so I have gotten a few tickets. I was dropping a check off at a night depository once on my way to work at 4:30 am when I was ambushed by 4 police cars, removed from my truck at gunpoint, and was told I fit the description of a recent burglary in the area. My photo was taken, photos of my vehicle, I was cuffed and in the car for 30 minutes before being let go. I SAY BS, they didn't know about the depository (property management co...I was dropping of the rent) and assumed I was up to no good.
The problem is that people (just like some here) are ready to accept this sort of thing because its for all of our "security". The attitude that this sort of garbage is acceptable is proof that the USA will get what it deserves...a loss of liberty in exchange for the delusion of security...

[edit on 29-1-2009 by odd1out]


Unfortunate that you had to go through this, on the other hand I believe the officers were being proactive in their search. What would people say if a robbery was just reported and then 20 minutes latter you saw 4 cop cars in front of a denney's?



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Last time I checked, no company had the authority to take away my rights. My fourth amendment guarantees:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Now, accordingly, the workers that check your bags at an airport would have to be company employees to make the search legal as a government employee should not be allowed to make such a search without a warrant. Secondly, If they wanted to search me, and I said no, they MUST acquiesce and allow me passage on to their plane or be opened up to a civil suit for violation of rights.

Since, these workers, are government employees, they must produce a prescribed warrant to search my belongings unless I'm under arrest every time I walk in to a terminal, and a blanket warrant is issued to every traveler. However, since they did not find anything, that would make it a false arrest would it not?

Either way, these acts of searching are unconstitutional, and should not stand.

As for the airport police, yes they are actual police officers, but they don't check your bags first, now do they? The goons that check your bags are the workers from Homeland Security that only have to pass the civil service test. That makes them equal to a postman. Do you think your average postman has the right to search your bags? I don't. Great points though



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Daedalu
 


Yes, this is going on where I live as well, and I fear it will get worse as individual cities coffers run dry with the economy. They have illegally put up Red Light Cameras in my town, despite the fact that the Governor has told them they are not authorized to do so. They allow a private company to run the cameras, which is a conflict of interest as the company makes more money with each ticket they distribute. The worst part is that in my town, they have these cameras set to they take a picture of you even if you have not run the light, but are simply inches in front of the tripwire used for the camera, and that tripwire is behind the white line of prolongation. Normally a police officer is required to see a misdemeanor infraction to even write such a ticket, but the towns are setting up ordnances to even get around that.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
reply to post by defcon5
 


Last time I checked, no company had the authority to take away my rights. My fourth amendment guarantees:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Now, accordingly, the workers that check your bags at an airport would have to be company employees to make the search legal as a government employee should not be allowed to make such a search without a warrant. Secondly, If they wanted to search me, and I said no, they MUST acquiesce and allow me passage on to their plane or be opened up to a civil suit for violation of rights.

Since, these workers, are government employees, they must produce a prescribed warrant to search my belongings unless I'm under arrest every time I walk in to a terminal, and a blanket warrant is issued to every traveler. However, since they did not find anything, that would make it a false arrest would it not?

Either way, these acts of searching are unconstitutional, and should not stand.




When you buy an airline ticket you are agreeing to the terms and conditions stated therein, they clearly advise all passengers of the fact that they as well as their baggage is subject to search and seizure if nessescary, so no they are not violating your constititutional rights.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by alyosha1981
 


They most certainly are! I don't care what "terms and conditions" they are trying to get you to buy in to, NO ONE, not a company, not a CEO, not a President has the right to supersede the Constitution without a vote to change the Constitution.

They can tell you all they want to that you can't get on their plane unless you submit to searches, but until they petition, Congress votes, and the fourth amendment is changed, they CAN NOT legally stop you. If they do, they are opened to a civil suit.

If you really believe that anybody has the ability to take away your rights, just because they have a sign up that says by doing x you agree to surrender y then I pity you. I'm not making these comments to inflame you but you must understand that these are your rights man. Don't buy in to the crap that someone can take it away just because you want to use a service.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
reply to post by alyosha1981
 


They most certainly are! I don't care what "terms and conditions" they are trying to get you to buy in to, NO ONE, not a company, not a CEO, not a President has the right to supersede the Constitution without a vote to change the Constitution.

They can tell you all they want to that you can't get on their plane unless you submit to searches, but until they petition, Congress votes, and the fourth amendment is changed, they CAN NOT legally stop you. If they do, they are opened to a civil suit.

If you really believe that anybody has the ability to take away your rights, just because they have a sign up that says by doing x you agree to surrender y then I pity you. I'm not making these comments to inflame you but you must understand that these are your rights man. Don't buy in to the crap that someone can take it away just because you want to use a service.


You didn't inflame me, I just think that we have the right to be protected, I'll imagine the person with the shoe bomb ready to blow telling the TSA people they cant search him without violating his rights, then he boards the plane, it takes off and he blows it up with all of those people on it. But good thing they didn't violate his rights...right? how would you feel if you were family to one killed in this ficticious scenario when the "authorities" said "well this could have been prevented but we didn't want to violate the mans rights"



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by alyosha1981
 


You can't be completely safe in a free society, but what point is my "safety" if I'm not free to enjoy it? Yes, you or someone you care about may die from that situation, And yes, it may come as little or no consolation that at least their rights weren't violated. But that's what this country was founded on. Rights, not safety.

What safety did black slaves have when they ran to the north to seek freedom?

They were "safe" on their plantation, they knew what the day would bring. But they couldn't live that way.

Russians were "safe" under Stalin, look what that illusion of safety cost them all in the end.

We could debate about this all night, for as much as you like to be safe, I like to be free, but the fact still remains. The airport security violate your rights.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
Last time I checked, no company had the authority to take away my rights. My fourth amendment guarantees:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Flying on an airline is not a right, it’s a contract between you and a business. Believe me I am an ex-airline employee. There are levels of security, and levels of ownership in airports. For example the county runs the building and owns the ramp, but they are leased to individual airlines. Airlines used to hire their won security for their terminal area, but own that falls under homeland security.

When you agree to fly on an airline or enter a security area in an airport, you agree to have certain rights taken away. Its not like they are coming into your house and searching your property, they are searching what you are carrying into their business. If you don’t agree to those rights being taken away, they have no problem with that, but you will not be allowed to fly on their airline or enter their terminal.


Originally posted by midnightbrigade
Now, accordingly, the workers that check your bags at an airport would have to be company employees to make the search legal as a government employee should not be allowed to make such a search without a warrant.

Airline personnel do not search bags, its only US Customs, and Homeland Security. In the old days, pre-911, only US Customs was allowed to search your bags. If an airline person opened your bag and was caught by a superior they could be arrested for theft of baggage.


Originally posted by midnightbrigade
Secondly, If they wanted to search me, and I said no, they MUST acquiesce and allow me passage on to their plane or be opened up to a civil suit for violation of rights.

Nope, here is where you are misunderstanding the way it works.
Your rights in this country do not mean that you can do anything you want, wherever, and whenever you want to. Businesses are allowed to deny service or admission for failure to comply with their rules. Airlines are private businesses, and this applies to them as well. There is nothing in the Constitution that guarantees you the right to passage on an airline, or into a private facility. If there was you could walk into any business you want whenever you pleased. The only thing that is guaranteed to you under the constitution is that they will not discriminate against you based on race, age, or religion.

If they decided that they were only going to search people with brown hair, then you would have a case for discrimination, but they search everyone, which is within THEIR rights. Other businesses besides airlines do the exact same thing. For example, you have to submit to a search before entering a crowded stadium, or an amusement park.


Originally posted by midnightbrigade
Since, these workers, are government employees, they must produce a prescribed warrant to search my belongings unless I'm under arrest every time I walk in to a terminal, and a blanket warrant is issued to every traveler. However, since they did not find anything, that would make it a false arrest would it not?

You waved your rights to have your bags searched when you bought the ticket to fly on the aircraft, check the small print on an old ticket. Its called “Conditions of Carriage”:

General Acceptance of Baggage
Only baggage as defined in the definition section will be accepted for transportation. All baggage is subject to inspection. Checked baggage will be accepted for transportation only on flights on which you are traveling. AIRLINENAME will not accept baggage whose size, weight, or character makes it unsuitable for transportation on the aircraft as determined by AIRLINENAME

I replaced the airline name, but you will find its the same for all airlines.


Originally posted by midnightbrigade
As for the airport police, yes they are actual police officers, but they don't check your bags first, now do they?

It’s not their job to do so.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


I'm glad that you attempted to pick apart my argument, but I must ask, How did you prove anything contrary to what I said?

You put the same "rules and regulations" argument in that you used in previous posts, never once answering my statement that they have no right to require you to give up your rights in the first place.

I'm glad that you used to be an airline employee, and your aren't just spouting off, but what gives ANY entity authority in this country other than the Constitution? Nothing. Just like a states laws can't violate something afforded to you in the Constitution, a companies policy's and procedures cant either. I'm not saying that flying on an airline is a right. I understand that. But what you are saying is that for the airport to search your bags, after you have paid them for a service, would be just as legal as McDonalds searching your backpack after you bought a Big Mac, as long as they have a sign over the register saying, by entering our store, you agree to have your belongings searched.

That damn sure wouldn't fly and neither should airport searchings. By the very nature of the bill of rights, that these rights are inalienable and are endowed to all people by their creator, simply means that you CANNOT surrender them. It's impossible. They are given to you just for being born and cannot be given up or taken away.

I understand that it's only Homeland Security and customs that search your bags, I was making an illustration. Also, I'm not talking about doing anything I want, I'm talking about an industry violating rights. Again with the McDonalds analogy, if I walk up to the counter in a Micky D's, then start creating a ruckus, I'm cool with them refusing to serve me their product. But I'm not cool with them saying I MUST submit to a search or they wont serve me their product.

There is no corporation on Earth that has higher authority than the Constitution, and you will never convince me otherwise.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by midnightbrigade
 



First thing is that McDonalds could in fact do that if they wanted to, but they wont as it would be inconvenient to their customers. McDonalds will refuse to serve you, however, if you show up in their store with no shirt or shoes on. This is similarly a violation of your rights, as you have the right to walk around barefoot if you wish. As I stated airports are no longer the only places conducting searches of bags, many places with a high volume of people now perform searches before you can enter their property. That is also part of protecting your other rights as well, ensuring that someone else does not bring something in to endanger your safety and violate your right to exist.


I think that you are maybe not realizing that businesses are entitled to rights the same way that you are. Your rights end when they infringe on the rights of another person, or in this case a business. As long as the rules remain constant across the board for all their customers, they are allowed to enforce them, even if they violate your constitutional rights. Since no one is forcing you to patronize them, there is no violation. If you chose to patronize somewhere with rules you disagree with, then you accept that you are going to follow their rules, even if you don’t like them. Does that make more sense?

As an example, I have seen folks on ATS try and argue that you don’t need a drivers license to drive a car as its covered under the “Right to Locomotion”. In reality, people who try this maneuver find out in court that requiring a driver’s license is not a violation of that right. There are other means of “Locomotion” that you can use beyond you operating a motor vehicle such as; riding on a bus, taking a cab, riding as a passenger, etc... However, if you want to operate a motor vehicle, you MUST have an operator’s license. Same kind of thing here, if you want to patronize somewhere, then their rules are not a violation of your rights, as you chose to accept them. You see what I am talking about?



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


I can see what you're trying to say, but I disagree. At McDonalds, showing up with no shirt or shoes would be not be protected under rights, as there is no right to bare feet, nor, to my knowledge, has there ever been a case where the courts stated that having bare feet in a business is covered under the first amendment. If there was, then not serving you would be a violation.

Don't think that I'm only grievanced by airports, ANY place that tries to search me without cause gets my asian orange acting up.

Also, please understand while I agree that someones right privacy, should not infringe on my right to exist, my right to exist shouldn't infringe on someones right to privacy.

If I carry a gun into McDonalds, they have no right to tell me to leave, but If I begin to wave that gun around, then my 2nd amendment begins to infringe on others. At THAT point, would they have a right to tell me to leave. If I am walking through an airport with a visible bomb, then yes, the airport has a right to search the rest of my belongings. But if you can't see one, you can't know what my intentions may be. Therefore, the airline has no right to search me.

Yes, I know, we wont know if you have a bomb until we search you, I get that, but at some point, as I said in an earlier post, you can't be 100 percent safe and free in the same society. This is where it goes back to what we were founded on. Now, you want to get technical about it, then to make things fair, as an example, you should have two planes. One plane you can get on as you please, no search and you take your life in to your own hands. The other, you can submit to searches, and be safe. I understand that of course, that's not practical but it illustrates exactly what I mean by having to choose one or the other. At that point however, THAT'S when it becomes a choice that all can live with

I totally agree with the license for the car however, that's a privilege.

Understand, my argument is not about what's a privilege or a right. My whole point is that no one, not the government, a corporation or a person has the right to take away my right, without a vote. That's all there it to it.

One last thing. When we all see how far down the rabbit hole we go, but first slipping on something as "mundane" as airport security, and SHTF, come to Oklahoma, look me up, and I will defend your 4th amendment right with my 2nd amendment right



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by midnightbrigade
 


Appreciate what you’re saying, but I think that you are still missing a couple of points. Which is most likely my fault as I am not too good at trying to explain things in text.

Anyhoo I think you are forgetting:

1) The rights of the majority out-weight the rights of one person. So the rights of a group of people to feel secure out-weighs the right of one person who has an issue with searches.
2) The airline has the duty to protect its passengers and its crew members, and they have the right to protect the investment they have in their equipment.
3) You can only call a foul to your rights if there is no other option available to you. So if you were on an island where only one airline flew out of that island, and there were no boats, then you could cry foul.
4) You can always do as stated above and charter a flight, though it would be expensive. Charter flights usually leave from the private hanger area of an airport.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 06:16 AM
link   
Sorry it took so long for me to respond. Occasionally, I do have to work on the night shift


1, You are absolutely correct. The majority in this country DO rule. So until I see the 4th amendment say "Illegal searches and seizures except in airports", my stance will remain the same. There is a legal and correct way to alter the 4th or any of the amendments, and that process is laid out in the Constitution. Until its voted on, it's an illegal search.

2, Yes, they do. They have the right to protect them in ways that do not violate the bill of rights. That is their limiting factor, good, bad, or indifferent that is all they can legally do. Also, when did the rights of a corporation, concerned about money or public image become more important than the right of an individual?

3,4, Yes, you are correct. If that was my only option, I most assuredly cry foul. My question to you is why do you say I have to choose to use a different method when my rights are guaranteed? You say I could choose, I say I shouldn't have to. I shouldn't have to take a train just to avoid my rights being infringed. During the civil rights movement, blacks could have chosen to just not ride the bus, or sit in black only restaurants. That doesn't mean they should have had to. And with enough effort, they were able to prove that.

The problem with this is bigger than 1 airplanes safety. The problem is that once a right is pushed, then it gets stepped on, and it's a very short trip before it's trampled on. Once it gets started, and people accept it, not long after, that right is gone. And if one right can be on paper, unaltered, but completely disregarded, then all of them can be.

That's NOT America. That's not a place that I want to live in. We have the greatest Constitution in the world, and if we aren't diligent in protecting it every day, we will wake up and it will be gone. I don't understand how you can't see that.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join