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.

 

A question for those who think the TSA Pat Downs violate their 4th Amendment rights...

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Actually, I think you missed the point of my entire post. The courts have not decided this issue, and no TSA bureaucrat has the authority to strip an American citizen of basic rights. This may be the way that fascist governments work, or the way the democrat administration here in the U.S. feels, but it is not consistent with the letter of the law.

This process has only been in effect for about two weeks, and it hasn't had time to work its way through the legal vetting process.

There will be lawsuits, there will most likely be civil and criminal actions against the TSA and its functionaries.

Again, to simplify the point, you do NOT lose rights just because you enter a point of transit.

This stuff will most probably be overturned, and good sense will prevail once again.




posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
A little "light reading" for the interested:

Owen v City of Independence, Maine v Thiboutot, et. al.:
All state that public servants have no immunity when they violate your rights. So this eliminates the "I'm just doing my job" response...

Norton v Shelby County:
An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed.

Fourth Amendment:
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.

Fifth Amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Hale v Henkel:
His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.

Also, re. body cavity searches, strip searches, etc.: See e.g., United States v. Himmelwright, 551 F.2d 991 (5th Cir.) cert. denied, 434 U.S. 902, 98 S.Ct. 298, 54 L.Ed.2d 189 (1977); 3 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment 281-95 (1978 & 1983 Supp.)


edit on 25-11-2010 by MMPI2 because: Factual correction of an earlier poster's errors.



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by MMPI2
 


I think you missed the idea of the whole OP... If you purchase an airline ticket, and you attempt to enter the gate area of an airport, you are consenting to a search of your person, whether it be reasonable or unreasonable, right down to a full on body cavity search if Security Personnel feel it's necessary. Your Constitutional rights DO NOT apply in this case! PERIOD!


Interesting point of discussion: When is a "right" a right and not a privilege? Of course we will have to agree to disagree.Peace and happy thanksgiving.

Heres an extreme point just to illustrate an armchair argument.Say My ticket says I give up "ALL" my rights(not just the protection from unreasonable search and seizure) and the TSO doesn't lke the "evil smirk" I can't seem to get rid of and decides to put a bullet in my forehead for the "safety of other passengers" and his job. Ridiculous ?yes: but my"ticket"said so: Aren't we are falling back nicely into the well worn well learned "respect authority box".

I think we might find some concensus here: The ticket doesn't have the power to grant the removal of my right to life."



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by MMPI2
 


For the cavity and strip searches, read the TSA blog. Still can't believe people haven't done their freaking research on this. THE TSA CAN AND WILL NOT PERFORM A STRIP OR CAVITY SEARCH ON YOU, THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED A PAT DOWN, BECAUSE THEY ARE ONLY PATTING YOU DOWN.



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Gnarly
 


And from what I've read, only if you refuse to go through the scanner...

I am still waiting for someone on the 'my rights are being violated' side of the debate to tell me how my 2nd Amendment rights are not being violated by my not being able to 'pack heat' on a domestic flight...



posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by Gnarly
 


And from what I've read, only if you refuse to go through the scanner...

I am still waiting for someone on the 'my rights are being violated' side of the debate to tell me how my 2nd Amendment rights are not being violated by my not being able to 'pack heat' on a domestic flight...



In my humble; armchair;(, no legal training) opinion they are. Here's gunrights activist David Codrea aproached for open carry in philadelphia by a philly policeman ( in dark trench coat and arm band.no less) .the officer demands he conceal his weapon or go to jail(?). David tells him respectfully his interpretation of the PA statute is wrong.and produces his copy of the law. The leo ramps up the contact" i'm not playin' I'll take that off you and take you to jail:

Mr.Codrea acquiesces and leaves; Rather than go to jail....So another Americans rights are suppressed by the gendarme. David could have fought and gone to jail spent months and lots of money on a legal defense.And still not gotten a judge to agree. Such is the sad state of affairs we find ourselves in today with regards to our "inalienable" rights.

Same up here we are one of the last two states with no concealed carry provision. We supposedly can carry openly: ( satisfying the second amendment) but if we open carry in reality the police are always called and the "offender"is arrested for disturbing the peace.( someone called the police; surely they were "disturbed")


Video From The Sipsey street irregulars" blog.


edit on 25-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by Gnarly
 


And from what I've read, only if you refuse to go through the scanner...

I am still waiting for someone on the 'my rights are being violated' side of the debate to tell me how my 2nd Amendment rights are not being violated by my not being able to 'pack heat' on a domestic flight...


Well, there are the dangers of a gun just being present on a plane. If it accidentally goes off and makes a hole, the plane is screwed. Plus, allowing guns to be allowed on planes, do you think people would rather not care about that? I'm sure the majority would mind very much so, as you could just ____ ____ up!



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Gnarly
 


Of course people would care if you carried a gun onto an airplane! So would I... and in that same vein, I care very much if someone smuggles some explosives in his/her crotch... When you fly you give up the expectation of privacy and you are agreeing to be searched. Not only for the safety of the couple hundred people who will be screaming through the air in the silver metal tube with you, but the rest of the general public on the ground underneath you... Like the few thousand people who were in Tower 1 and Tower 2 on a certain day in September a few years back...



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gnarly

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by Gnarly
 


And from what I've read, only if you refuse to go through the scanner...

I am still waiting for someone on the 'my rights are being violated' side of the debate to tell me how my 2nd Amendment rights are not being violated by my not being able to 'pack heat' on a domestic flight...


Well, there are the dangers of a gun just being present on a plane. If it accidentally goes off and makes a hole, the plane is screwed. Plus, allowing guns to be allowed on planes, do you think people would rather not care about that? I'm sure the majority would mind very much so, as you could just ____ ____ up!


purely arnmchair discussion: I don't carry around the house or in public (as I see no need) occasionally in the woods. The T.V."myth busters" busted the explosive decompression myth by pressurizing an airliner fuselage to the pressure difference at some altitude and fired several bullets at the windows and through the skin.

IIRC EXACTLY NONE resulted in rapid violent decompression. I think the public is largely miss informed by tv and movies about guns. they are inanimate tools;they are not going to jump out of my holster or a case and get you.
.I was trained and qualified with the 1911 .45; m-16; mp-5(schweeeeet) and the mp-5k while on active duty. I just don't understand the irrational fear displayed by anti-gunners at the mere sight of a firearm; I guess if you don't understand them you bestow them with evil mojo.

Mythbusterpart1of2





mythbuster part2

edit on 26-11-2010

by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


What I want to know is:

Why does everyone over look the issue of consent when it comes to the 4A..

If an officer comes into your home with no warrant or consent, that is not reasonable..

If an officer comes into your home with no warrant but your consent that is reasonable to the degree that you specify. If they say "I want to search your whole house" and you say "Yep!" then they can do that.. So if a TSA agent says "I want to search your person, with an enhanced pat down procedure or a full body scanner" and you say "Yep!" then you don't have any room to cry your 4A Rights violated.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
The issue for me is that the government in combination with corporations have gone too far, in general.

The TSA thing is a public and aggressive swipe at the general citizenry, just another in a chain of actions that have degraded our rights over time. You can probably find a way to justify just about anything. After all, the constitution directly obligates the government to protect the citizens. Under that statement we could all be chained and sedated 24 hours a day so that no one can possibly hurt anyone else...

It all depends on what we accept. The documents don't actually give us anything but words. It is the value we place on those words and the publics willingness to demand that the government be held to those words as WE interpret them that gives us strength and freedoms.

If you look at the string of activities, there is a pattern.

-Moving to a credit based economy (everyone will be more rich!) - Failed but gave corporations unprecedented power over the populous.

-Patriot Act(s) (you'll be safer!) - Undermined every major right of American citizens (on paper).

-Government expansion (DHS/TSA, ect.) - Government gathering data and monitoring citizens at unprecedented levels.

-Government allies with corporations (google, ect.) - Laws enabling corporate data gathering and forcing corps to create "backdoors" in products/services, government demands that corps share data. - Historically Unparalleled surveillance of citizenry. Able to see you in stores, what you read, what you eat, hear you talk through phones, text, email, webcams, see all financial records, track you in real time through phones, gps, wireless network locations. It goes on.... (secret courts, unlimited detainment, bypassing courts rulings on warrants, general insanity meant to lessen the potential for the constitutional system to protect us.)

-Government declares "constitutionalists" and those that refuse searches to be extremists. (opening them the powers of the patriot act for the act of disagreeing with the government openly!).

Whether someone means too or not, we are slipping constantly towards a dystopian reality. The point is, at some point we have to prioritize our rights, our privacy, our independence ahead of our governments desires, regardless of costs, or else we will wake up in a nightmare of government control and be unable to fart without them making note of it.

Most of that activity is just in the last 9 years too!

We tell them to back off now, or we do it when it's "too late". I won't live like a rat trapped in an experiment. I am afraid that social engineering has done it's job all too well though. I can almost hear America begging to be told what to say, what to think, what to wear, how to raise their children....

It's really quite sickening atm.


edit on 26-11-2010 by Fiberx because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


What I want to know is:

Why does everyone over look the issue of consent when it comes to the 4A..

If an officer comes into your home with no warrant or consent, that is not reasonable..

If an officer comes into your home with no warrant but your consent that is reasonable to the degree that you specify. If they say "I want to search your whole house" and you say "Yep!" then they can do that.. So if a TSA agent says "I want to search your person, with an enhanced pat down procedure or a full body scanner" and you say "Yep!" then you don't have any room to cry your 4A Rights violated.


I agree although there is some coercion( force) on the part of the govt : as in if you don't consent to subordinating your right.; you don't get to fly.

Kinda like your cop above: "Sir can I search your residence ?" Well what if I say "no" ? Then I'llhaveto kick you in the testicles"...
"Well why didn't you say so in the first place search away".

Any other rights you'd like to be forcibly relieved of ?


edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join