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.

 

TSA 'enhanced pat-downs’ and Seat Belts

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Not wanting to throw other, more active threads off topic, I want to start this thread for discussion.

There have been recent debates to whether the 'enhanced pat-downs' are a violation of our constitutional rights. I for one am not afraid to fly due to the recent events in history or care that I must be scanned in order to enter a plane to travel. I do agree the pat-downs are an uncomfortable act they are forcing all of us to adhere to. Having a 4 year old child who travels with me often I have to say if I saw them doing these things to my daughter I would more then likely be arrested. At the same time I have recently been on 10 trips all to NYC area and back with her and had not 1 incident I would bat an eye at (or even one that I saw). And was only asked to go through the scanner once in 20 flights (without my daughter having to).
Now to make a point, I HATE seat-belts in cars, I refuse to wear them. In the past years I have been pulled over and ticketed several times for it. One of such times I was 'explaining' to the officer my opinion on this topic when he ordered me to get out of the car. I was pat-down by 2 officers, had my car searched, time waisted and ticketed for the seatbelt. I was nearly arrested for obstruction! They had no probable cause to pull me over since it occurred at a toll booth in which a cop was standing looking in the cars as they went by. When I went to court I contested the ticket to no avail. If I did not pay, well you know what would happen then.
Well seat belt laws are for our safety also and given police use this as a way of pulling certain people over now I find this way more offensive then the airport security lines. I fly a lot, but I drive every day, several times a day. I've been in many accidents without ever wearing a seatbelt, I have yet to be hospitalized for any of it. It should be my imperative to NOT want to wear a seatbelt, it affects no one but me and the poor soul who has to scrape me off the road. What I don't get is why more people are offended by the airport pat-downs then this, which effects more or less everyone who drives on a daily basis.
Can any of you tell me why this isn't as important?




posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
You don't have to have someone grope you to put on your seat belt.
Just sayin.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


I haven't had anyone grope me or my daughter in 20 flights.

I've been harassed more over a seatbelt in a car then I've ever been on a plane. Most of the time for bs reasons. To me everyone is screaming this airline thing is a violation of our constitutional rights I see way more violations in my everyday life. Why should it be necessary for me to wear a seatbelt while driving?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


Ever since most people were a baby there parents buckled them in. Most are conditioned to it and it is unobtrusive to there daily life. These pat downs are brand new so we as adults aren't conditioned to them. If our children grow up being patted down, most won't bat an eye at it when they reach adulthood. I agree though, it should be your choice to wear a seatbelt or not. I just won't fly unless I have absolutely have to now.

P.S. (off-topic)
I work on a 911 ambulance. Please try and wear your seatbelt. I've worked very nasty wrecks where unrestrained drivers and passengers, were hurt severely. Last week an unrestrained 14 year old girl was killed in an accident. The only one not hurt was the driver, who was wearing a seatbelt.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


Why did you let them search your car?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by 22-250
 


I didn't want to let them search my car they just pulled me out when I argued this wasn't right, what they were doing to me. They closed the toll booth gate another police car came behind me and I was taken out of the car and over to the police car. They asked to search my trunk and I refused but I had a 300ZX which is a hatchback so they climbed over and did it anyway!

Should I note I am an italian white male and this happened on the parkway in NJ. Believe me I don't fit the racial profile for the area.
edit on 11/17/2010 by AnteBellum because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


Sounds like they broke the law.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


There is an inconsistency with seat belt laws...several states do not require helmets for motorcycles and let alone a seat belt. That being said is whats going on with the TSA is not even comparable.

Since 9-11 as far as I am aware there has not been a domestic terrorist attempt on a domestic flight within the USA that was foiled in flight like the shoe bomber and underwear bomber where both attempts originated outside of the USA.

But yet somehow the USA govt managed to put into place security procedures to stop these types of attacks within the USA even though since 9-11 there has been zero successful attempts within the USA even with the immediate post 9-11 security procedures that seemed to me to be working pretty well.

The bottom line is that every attempt made outside the USA to commit terrorism on a plane has resulted in more restrictive and intrusive security procedures for those of us that fly within the USA.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Your comparison of "enhanced pat-downs" and seat belts is a false analogy.

While both do fall under the justification of "safety", there are 2 major reasons why the analogy is false.

1) Car accidents kill about 30,000 people a year (in the USA). The law to wear a seat belt by financial penalty is a reasonable requirement that does no infringe on your right to travel freely, and the fact that about 11,000 people a year are saved from deaths because of the seat belt law is a POSITIVE result for society as a whole.

2) Death by Terrorist Actions on board airplanes kills about ZERO (0) people a year for the last 5 years. Enhanced Pat-downs are unreasonably invasive procedures that are NOT JUSTIFIED by the proposed threat they are purported to prevent (which by the way is ZERO). So the procedure is designed to reduce deaths by 0% - which is an UNJUSTIFIABLE escalation in security laws requirements.

In summary:
Car Deaths (30,000 per year) + Seat Belt Laws (does NOT infringe) = 11,000 lives saved (JUSTIFIABLE)
Airplane Deaths by Terrorists (0 per year) + Enhanced Pat-Downs (DOES infringe) = 0 lives saved (UNJUSTIFIABLE)

So do you now understand why the analogy is false?
edit on 17-11-2010 by harrytuttle because: url



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   
You have a choice not to wear your seatbelt in your car. You don't have a choice about these scanners or pat downs. It's do it or don't fly.

One question...

Who is checking you every time you get into your vehicle to see whether that belt is buckled?
edit on 17-11-2010 by GAOTU789 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 

Exactly, the proper analogy to cars would be, do cops RANDOMLY reach into your car to grab your junk every time you jump in to drive? That's a messed up thought.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by etshrtslr
 


I don't know if your seeing what I'm getting at. But I see the seat belt laws in effect as a blatant disregard for my civil liberties as a driver on the road. Who benefits from having this law other then the one wearing the belt? My rights along with many others I have talked to have had the same experiences in regards to seat belt oppression. These laws serve the general public in no way, would I drive better with a seat belt on or off? Just like would I be safer being screened to the degree I am before a domestic flight.
With that said police now use this as an excuse to pull innocent drivers over that they feel are more likely to be doing something wrong. At least with airplanes they have a scapegoat (terrorists) to get away with what they are doing, but with automobiles it strictly for our safety and being blatantly misused. And with 190 million drivers on the roads in the usa I see this as a more pertinent issue then the much smaller number of airline passengers being affected.
People on other posts claimed these pat-downs were the small start of our liberties being taken away, I agree and think there are other issues parallel and more abundant.

. . . the seat belt laws definitely infringed on me several times and with airbags now in vast numbers all over the cars I just don't believe the need to 'buckle up' is as important as the government lends us to believe as far as making it illegal to not wear. I still don't wear my seatbelt and if I die it is my choice to, but every time a cop pulls behind me I grab the belt out of fear of being pulled over and ticketed or worse. It is my car, an extension of my personal property as defined by the law, so why do I still have to abide by laws that effect no one but me? When I go on to a domestic flight I know beforehand what is about to occur at the security gate but it is not my plane and I will be sitting with numerous strangers all who's lives could be effected if I decide to try and blow it up.
edit on 11/17/2010 by AnteBellum because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


We should take this one point at a time so we both understand each other.

I think we both agree seat belt laws for the most part only protect the individual from their own stupidity even though I do think it should be mandatory for children.

The first part of my previous post is that there is an inconsistency in seat belt laws.

Most states to not mandate helmets for motorcycle riders which would no doubt save lives..... why is the law not equal for both forms of transportation if its all about saving lives?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by etshrtslr
 




Most states to not mandate helmets for motorcycle riders which would no doubt save lives..... why is the law not equal for both forms of transportation if its all about saving lives?


Because I don't think it's about saving lives for automobile drivers and airplane passengers alike. I wrote earlier in another thread that 4 people could easily build a bomb and sneak it onto a plane, using ceramics. One could get the pieces needed on and later in the air put them together. I learned this from a neighbor of mine that works in a military lab here in. . . alone the parts are harmless, together BOOM! They are aware of this, as far as I know, that is why I don't think they are doing it for our safety. Maybe it's to restore consumer interests (less fear) in domestic flying and they took it a little too far. With facial recognition and 'emotional recognition' systems in place they can't be trying to single people out in the security lines for all these cameras are by the ticket booths and beyond.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 



What you said about your neighbor and ceramics is really interesting and beyond any knowledge I have and I think that it is something new we should all consider. What I thought I was trying to address was your question on state seat belt laws and there relevance or non relevance to airport security.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by etshrtslr
 


The only relevance I was making in this thread was that they are both violations of our civil liberties.
Not to repeat things I've already said but in another thread I was deliberately playing devils advocate because too many people grandstand on such topics. I wanted to reach the heart of the problem, not address the symptoms. In doing so it seems everyone thinks this is one of the first steps of our government into taking our rights away as citizens, but I agree and disagree. It is a violation - enhanced pat-downs. But there are many more violations like this that effect all of us on a much more grander scale everyday. Most people do not fly everyday and it is not their airplane, it is owned and run by others and shared by strangers. In automobiles by law it is an extension of ones property but our government feels it necessary to protect us from harm by making it illegal to not use our seat belts. I don't believe this is the case I feel this law is used as an excuse to stop people when no other motive dictates.
There are many more issues at hand, undercover police can pose as delivery men to look inside homes with no warrants then after spotting some minor infraction call marked policemen to gain entry for search and seizure. The war on drugs is a hoax used for financial gain to supply money to our government. Do you think all the seized money/drugs goes into the fire. Why isn't alcohol banned it destroys more lives then any other substance here. A detective friend of mine in Plainfield, NJ was told to offer a $1000 reward to narcs they turned for every kilo of coke taken off the street, $100 for every gun but nothing for heroin and marijuana. When I asked why not the drugs being most misused he told me supply and demand. On top of it other countries have miracle drugs to get people off of legal prescriptions and illicit drugs but these new drugs are more illegal in the USA then the drugs being misused.

Ibogaine Miracle drug for addicts

I do not want to be protected from myself, in a plane I can understand the need for security, but again I think they are overdoing it. What is next on there list of right infringement disguised for our safety state to state passports or chipped licensees, gun control, food additives, curfews, property laws, etc., etc. etc..

edit on 11/18/2010 by AnteBellum because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join