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, does it have the right?

page: 10
3
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   
unless you sign something that says "I hereby give up my constitutional rights" you do not give up your rights. Even then it's a lame argument. Rights are God given not administered by the government. My two cents.




posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


As I've already mentioned numerous times in this thread, and I'm getting tired of repeating myself, just because a system isn't perfect doesn't mean it shouldn't be in place.

Many people get sent to jail and upon release re-offend, so by your reasoning we shouldn't send them there in the first place because it's not a 100% effective method?

What about body armour? It's not proven to save lifes in 100% of cases so should we just not bother with it all?

It's a weak argument mate.

If one in 5 women were being subjected to a vaginal search on a daily basis without cause for consent then I'd understand where you are coming from.

However, a random physical pat down is nothing similiar in the slightest and if you have nothing to hide then I see no objection. As far as going through the scanners is concerned, same principle; if you have nothing to hide then whats the issue?

Do you really believe the US Government is "storing" naked images of its citizens so creeps can jerk off to them? Because thats what the majority of people are implying in this thread...

Pat down searches and scanners are their for YOUR protection, as already mentioned, if/when the next terrorist attack occurs and there were no security protocols in place you would be on here in a jot screaming about how the US should have done more.

Anyone worried about being subjected to a random physical search has bigger issues than the terrorists do, get off your high horses and being all namby pamby with "it's my body" or "it's an invasion of my physical space" Please...



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by jfj123
 


As I've already mentioned numerous times in this thread, and I'm getting tired of repeating myself, just because a system isn't perfect doesn't mean it shouldn't be in place.

So you're in favor of how the third reich was run ?
I mean that system wasn't perfect either but hey, why throw the baby out with the bath water right?


Many people get sent to jail and upon release re-offend, so by your reasoning we shouldn't send them there in the first place because it's not a 100% effective method?

Not even a close analogy. Try again.
I'm saying lets not stand by and allow CONSTITUTIONAL violations to occur. The TSA and the government are the criminals.


What about body armour? It's not proven to save lifes in 100% of cases so should we just not bother with it all?

Wow ! swing and a miss again !

It's a weak argument mate.

Yes you have a weak argument.


If one in 5 women were being subjected to a vaginal search on a daily basis without cause for consent then I'd understand where you are coming from.

So that is where you are going to take your stand? When one in five women are raped by the TSA?


However, a random physical pat down is nothing similiar in the slightest

It's not random.
It's not just a pat down.


and if you have nothing to hide then I see no objection.

OK so when the police come knocking on your door without a warrant, probable cause, or anything, and want to search your home, your families homes and your friends homes, that's ok too? I mean it should be if you have nothing to hide....RIGHT?
After all it's to make you more safe....RIGHT?


As far as going through the scanners is concerned, same principle; if you have nothing to hide then whats the issue?

All homes from now on will be built with completely glass walls and nobody will be allowed to put curtains up. I mean if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't have a problem with that....RIGHT?


Do you really believe the US Government is "storing" naked images of its citizens so creeps can jerk off to them?

I believe that they've stated these images cannot be stored. Now we find out-big surprise-not only can they be stored but they can be transferred and yep THEY ARE ALREADY ON THE NET! So big surprise, the government lied again about how these machines would be operated.


Pat down searches and scanners are their for YOUR protection,

No they are not.
If they were really doing things for our protection, they wouldn't even bother with these ineffective procedures. This is what they would do:
Implement Israeli procedures and use psycho analysts to talk with passengers.
Have bomb sniffing dogs.
Have bomb sniffing machines.
Have metal detectors.
Profile.
So, since they want to do things for our protection, why don't they do these, proven effective things? You tell me? I mean it's for our protection, RIGHT?
They just want to make us safer, RIGHT?
They're just trying to help, RIGHT?
Well that's how they can help.

edit on 20-11-2010 by jfj123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


Once again your just spouting political mumbo jumbo and personal thoughts about your so called rights being removed and well done, now your comparing pat down searches to the Nazi's, brilliant!

You seem to miss a few fundamental things in your "argument"; ceramic knifes are not detected by dog sniffers, bomb detection devices or scanners. Two; random physical searches act as a deterrent and if that prevents even one, yep just one, life being saved then I'm all for it.

I'd like to give you a physical pat down right now, just to see your reaction



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron


Do you really believe the US Government is "storing" naked images of its citizens so creeps can jerk off to them?


Yes.

Oops, the feds have been storing naked body images



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by jfj123
 


I'd like to give you a physical pat down right now, just to see your reaction


Disgusting.

You should be ashamed for saying such a thing.



*Let me guess, now that you've been called on it you will pretend you were 'just joking' and expect us to believe you?



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by jfj123
 


I'd like to give you a physical pat down right now, just to see your reaction


Disgusting.

You should be ashamed for saying such a thing.



*Let me guess, now that you've been called on it you will pretend you were 'just joking' and expect us to believe you?


That's an issue you seem to have though isn't it? You like to antagonize people by suggesting what they say is incorrect and/or untrue.

Nope, I'm not joking. I would also like to give you a pat down right now, just so you could see the fuss your making about nothing...



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by jfj123
 


Once again your just spouting political mumbo jumbo

Yes the CONSTITUTION is mumbo jumbo......I guess you told me.


and personal thoughts about your so called rights being removed and well done, now your comparing pat down searches to the Nazi's, brilliant!

Glad to see you're finally on board



You seem to miss a few fundamental things in your "argument"; ceramic knifes are not detected by dog sniffers, bomb detection devices or scanners.

And what will a ceramic knife do? Will it get into the hardened cockpits of the airplanes? Do you honestly think a hundred passengers will allow some clown with a ceramic knife to take over a plane again? Come on ! What a straw man argument !
And no matter what procedures are implemented, things will get through.


Two; random physical searches act as a deterrent and if that prevents even one, yep just one, life being saved then I'm all for it.

They aren't random. Why do you keep saying that? Everyone gets to choose between having naked photos of them taken and put on the internet or molested. Those are your 2 choices if you fly.


I'd like to give you a physical pat down right now, just to see your reaction

My reaction would put you in the hospital. That's assault and I'd have a legal right to defend myself and I'd use it

edit on 20-11-2010 by jfj123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


Your becoming incredibly boring, incredibly quickly.... Just for the record:


Assault is a crime of violence against another person. In some jurisdictions, including Australia and New Zealand, as well as the USA, assault refers to an act that causes another to apprehend an immediate harmful contact, whereas the actual contact itself is called "battery." The word "apprehend" doesn't equate with fear. While fear encompasses apprehension, a victim can be apprehensive of unwanted contact, yet still not be in fear of it. For example, most people are apprehensive of a cat scratch, but they may not be fearful of such an event. A distinction must be made between the tort of assault, which is a civil matter, and criminal assault, for which the state will prosecute a wrongdoer. Within the arena of criminal law, an assault can result from an attempted battery. Since some attempted batteries might theoretically occur when the victim is sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise unaware of the threat, criminal battery can occur even when no threat is perceived by the victim. With the tort of assault, in contrast, a perceived threat by the victim is paramount.[1]


So no, legally it would not be assault. Whether you believe that you would "put me in hospital" is down to subjective interpretation but with your narrow minded views and reluctance to listen to anyones opinion who has a different view than yours I'd welcome you to try.

Once again, how many times do I have to say this, even if a ceramic knife isn't going to pierce a hardened cockpit does that mean it's okay for it to be in the possession of a person on a plane who intends to use it to harm others?

Maybe a ceramic knife isn't going to down a plane, but that makes it acceptable not to check for such weapons and risk some nutjob passing though security and slitting a few peoples throats?
edit on 20/11/10 by Death_Kron because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Nope, I'm not joking. I would also like to give you a pat down right now, just so you could see the fuss your making about nothing...


Please stop voicing your desire to assault ATS members.

You say you are serious and that is disturbing.


*If you criminally assault people you should expect them to defend themselves and/or press charges. I suppose that would be educational, along with the jail time - which would give you time to contemplate whether or not the act you perpetrated was worth it.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Please stop voicing your desire to assault ATS members.

You say you are serious and that is disturbing.


*If you criminally assault people you should expect them to defend themselves and/or press charges. I suppose that would be educational, along with the jail time - which would give you time to contemplate whether or not the act you perpetrated was worth it.


Please see above definition of the word assault.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by jfj123
 


Your becoming incredibly boring, incredibly quickly.

You on the other hand, I find quite amusing


For the record, in The United States of America

American common law has defined assault as an attempt to commit a battery.

Assault is typically treated as a misdemeanor and not as a felony (unless it involves a law enforcement officer). The more serious crime of aggravated assault is treated as a felony.

Four elements were required at common law:

1. The apparent, present ability to carry out;
2. An unlawful attempt;
3. To commit a violent injury;
4. Upon another.

Simple assault can be distinguished without the intent of injury upon another person. The violation of one's personal space or touching in a way the victim deemed inappropriate can be simple assault.

So yes, you'd be committing assault by attempting to grab me without my permission.


So no, legally it would not be assault.

Yes it would.


Whether you believe that you would "put me in hospital" is down to subjective interpretation but with your narrow minded views and reluctance to listen to anyones opinion who has a different view than yours I'd welcome you to try.

If you attempt to assault me, I would defend myself.


Once again, how many times do I have to say this, even if a ceramic knife isn't going to pierce a hardened cockpit does that mean it's okay for it to be in the possession of a person on a plane who intends to use it to harm others?

Is it ok? NO
Will it happen no matter what? YES


Maybe a ceramic knife isn't going to down a plane, but that makes it acceptable not to check for such weapons and risk some nutjob passing though security and slitting a few peoples throats?

You can't be FREE and SAFE. You have to pick.
You make yourself sound to be some kind of bad @ss here yet you shrink at a small risk of some nutjob taking over a plane with a knife. So which is it? Are you a scared little boy or are you a man that can stand up for his freedoms? Just curious


We in the United States of America are FREE and want to stay that way, even with the risks that go along with it.

edit on 20-11-2010 by jfj123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


You are not legally allowed to walk up to anyone and begin running your hands over their body.

I have screencaptured your posts in case you decide to edit out your expression of desire to assault myself and jfj.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


You are not legally allowed to walk up to anyone and begin running your hands over their body.

I have screencaptured your posts in case you decide to edit out your expression of desire to assault myself and jfj.


I wouldn't worry. People like him are all bark and no bite

They're tuff when hiding behind their computer monitor but when it comes right down to it, they're just scared little kids.
By the way, nice to see someone who actually gets what is going on



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
You on the other hand, I find quite amusing


For the record, in The United States of America

American common law has defined assault as an attempt to commit a battery.

Assault is typically treated as a misdemeanor and not as a felony (unless it involves a law enforcement officer). The more serious crime of aggravated assault is treated as a felony.

Four elements were required at common law:

1. The apparent, present ability to carry out;
2. An unlawful attempt;
3. To commit a violent injury;
4. Upon another.

Simple assault can be distinguished without the intent of injury upon another person. The violation of one's personal space or touching in a way the victim deemed inappropriate can be simple assault.

So yes, you'd be committing assault by attempting to grab me without my permission.


So no, legally it would not be assault.


I'm glad I amuse someone, I've been called a little boring recently so your interest in me has boosted my ego, albeit ever so slightly.

Please see above bolded text, a physical pat down is not intended to cause injury so it wouldn't be classed as assault.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


You are not legally allowed to walk up to anyone and begin running your hands over their body.

I have screencaptured your posts in case you decide to edit out your expression of desire to assault myself and jfj.





Please send it to the appropriate agencies, I'd love to see the response with regards to my threat of "assault".



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

By the way, nice to see someone who actually gets what is going on


Thanks.

There are alot more of us than there are authoritarian types. They are just really vocal.

Most people agree with us. The 'I don't have anything to hide I don't mind...' types are the minority.


*The people are starting to come around. I think the hard times are helping to get people focused on what matters.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   
The entire method and thinking of the TSA screening process is BS.

I am a US citizen and I don't need to be treated like a criminal just because I want to take a flight. The TSA rules are assuming that I am a terrorist so I must be scanned, searched and groped. Why is the Federal Government involved to begin with?
Airlines are private businesses and should be able to provide their own security.

If the TSA wants to search me and my belongings then they must have probable cause and a warrant. We don't give up our rights just because we would like to take a plane ride.

We should conduct ourselves more like Israel regarding the airports. There is no bigger target than Israel and even they don't have these retarded TSA rules. Profiling is the answer. Not racial profiling but criminal profiling. That makes the most sense.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
The entire method and thinking of the TSA screening process is BS.

I am a US citizen and I don't need to be treated like a criminal just because I want to take a flight. The TSA rules are assuming that I am a terrorist so I must be scanned, searched and groped. Why is the Federal Government involved to begin with?
Airlines are private businesses and should be able to provide their own security.

If the TSA wants to search me and my belongings then they must have probable cause and a warrant. We don't give up our rights just because we would like to take a plane ride.

We should conduct ourselves more like Israel regarding the airports. There is no bigger target than Israel and even they don't have these retarded TSA rules. Profiling is the answer. Not racial profiling but criminal profiling. That makes the most sense.


Ermmm, but what if you are a terrorist? How do they know you are not?

"Profiling is the answer"
Have you any idea of the computing power and time it would take to profile every single person that walks through an airport on a daily basis???



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Please see above bolded text, a physical pat down is not intended to cause injury so it wouldn't be classed as assault.

You missed this part

Simple assault can be distinguished without the intent of injury upon another person. The violation of one's personal space or touching in a way the victim deemed inappropriate can be simple assault.

If you attempted to pat me down, you'd be touching me without my permission and be guilty of an assault.
And yes I'd press charges.




top topics



 
3
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join