Feds Issue Threat: No Fly Zone for Texas

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


They should use dogs instead. They are far more efficient and will track where these substances are, rather than have every passenger screened.

Russia uses dogs...they haven't had a 9/11 incident yet. We could learn from them....

news.bbc.co.uk...

They're also a lot cheaper...TSA is a waste of money and is an excuse to keep unskilled federal workers employed. They should be working at McD's not in an airport.

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

They should use dogs instead. They are far more efficient and will track where these substances are, rather than have every passenger screened.

Russia uses dogs...they haven't had a 9/11 incident yet.

Russia knows too much about them to allow a strike there. People stateside freak out and panic when they see dogs and will clog up the Secondary areas as people won't know how to cheque their emotions. Russia is more dictatorial then us anyhow.

Case Law

The Right To Travel As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

www.usconstitution.net...

Magna Carta

* (42) In future it shall be lawful for any man to leave and return to our kingdom unharmed and without fear, by land or water, preserving his allegiance to us, except in time of war, for some short period, for the common benefit of the realm. People that have been imprisoned or outlawed in accordance with the law of the land, people from a country that is at war with us, and merchants - who shall be dealt with as stated above - are excepted from this provision.

www.fordham.edu...

Originally posted by NuroSlam
Case Law

The Right To Travel As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

www.usconstitution.net...

Magna Carta

* (42) In future it shall be lawful for any man to leave and return to our kingdom unharmed and without fear, by land or water, preserving his allegiance to us, except in time of war, for some short period, for the common benefit of the realm. People that have been imprisoned or outlawed in accordance with the law of the land, people from a country that is at war with us, and merchants - who shall be dealt with as stated above - are excepted from this provision.

www.fordham.edu...

edit on 26-5-2011 by NuroSlam because: (no reason given)

The Constitution says nothing about free travel and says nowhere that the travel is a right. Some of our laws might be based upon Magna but nowhere in the US is Magna recognized as an official legal template.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


Notice case law.

Texas is only the start. It is being made an example of so when the Feds. take over the other states they WILL follow suit as no other state will come to assist them. I find it ironic that the other states have not VOICED their concerns and show their support by officially speaking out. Oh right.. its not in my backyard. But by the time it is.. there won't be any more border states but one big happy family run by one power.

Originally posted by Willbert
Texas is only the start. It is being made an example of so when the Feds. take over the other states they WILL follow suit as no other state will come to assist them. I find it ironic that the other states have not VOICED their concerns and show their support by officially speaking out. Oh right.. its not in my backyard. But by the time it is.. there won't be any more border states but one big happy family run by one power.

No other state is coming to Austin's back because every other state is asking themselves "What the flip is wrong with Texas?" and is looking at what Austin is doing like "They did what?" type deal.

reply to post by impressme


Promoting Anti Governmental actions are we?

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

They should use dogs instead. They are far more efficient and will track where these substances are, rather than have every passenger screened.

Russia uses dogs...they haven't had a 9/11 incident yet. We could learn from them....

Yes, it is absolutely true about the dogs in Russia.
But scanners are widely used here too... I mean 99% of Moscow cinemas have metal-detectors at the entrance (and security that always wants to look inside your bags), airports are using x-ray scanners (the "undressing" ones) and so on.
After a few explosions at the metro (subway) people really are paranoid.

Also we had situations compatible to 9/11 - I remember series of explosions at high-rise apartment buildings somewhere about 1999... And also series of explosions at the subway.. last time 2 years ago... With many many victims both times.

reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN


WHY does everything have to be a liberal-bashing thread/post?

ALL Americans, regardless of political stripe, need to stand up against this tyranny.

Only an idiot would not see just how wrong it is!

reply to post by slugger9787


What you waiting for? Get out there and water it!

Are any of the armchair patriots on here going to do something?

Texas should up the ante and turn around and say the following:
No more helium and no more oil for the rest of the country. Texas is the largest producer of helium, is still pumping oil and gas out of the ground, so that could turn around and have a pinch for the US. The US needs all three, think this can get to be an interesting show down between the federal government and the State, it is something we should watch very carefully.

Every state needs to get on board with shutting down the TSA and defending the 4th and10th amendment.

The FED's using blackmail as a resort to deter Texas from passing a bill is wrong and a terrorist act.

The FED members responsible for the blackmail letter should be tried with treason against the people of the USA in clear violation of the 4th and10th amendments.

The Government has gone rogue from the People, Constitution and Bill of Rights, The current government body should and must be dissolved for their criminal acts against the people and all involved with the treason must be held accountable for their actions.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

No other state is coming to Austin's back because every other state is asking themselves "What the flip is wrong with Texas?" and is looking at what Austin is doing like "They did what?" type deal.

edit on 26-5-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)

That's because the other states are too scared to lose their precious federal funding. I think you assume too much when you say that the PEOPLE in other states are wondering what's wrong with Texas. I believe they'd have a lot of support if they sacked up and put this bill through.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

No other state is coming to Austin's back because every other state is asking themselves "What the flip is wrong with Texas?" and is looking at what Austin is doing like "They did what?" type deal.

Please quote a source for this....

Or is it nothing but your opinion??

They should of called their bluff. It isn't called Texas Hold 'em for nothing. They can't stop flights to and from Texas. Impossible.
1 - The airlines would be furious.
2 - I wouldn't of been suprised if it would of turn into a mini civil war down there. And with all the guns in Texas...

I hope our governments realize the harm they are doing and/or get a concience. They are not only letting their fellow country men loose their civil liberties but also their freinds, their wives and husbands. They are condemning their children and grand children. What kind of human beings are they!!

Texas should call the Fed's bluff. Its time for this TSA airport thing to come to a head.

All you who support the TSA are a bunch of pansies that can't handle real freedom anyway. If you want to submit to authority like a dog with his tail between his legs then that's your business. Maybe there should be separate flights for pansies that want government to hold their hand and tell them they are safe while feeling their genitals. The rest of us who aren't paranoid wackos thinking the hot soccer mom with her six year old daughter has a death wish for everyone can go on living like real Americans.

Free men and women are free simply because we exist - its our birthright. No government "gives" us freedom and no government can take our freedoms away. Our rights don't "end" at the airport, grocery store, mall or highway. The bill of rights are limits on government - not something that grants rights - I suggest you go read them again - or maybe for the first time.

Originally posted by showintail
Having read the link, I only have 3 words for Texas,

REMEMBER THE ALAMO!!!

Right on!!!!! Git up get out do something, cause if ya like fish and grits and all that pimp #..... oh yerrrr....