Breaking: Libertarians Call For Arrest Of TSA Agents

reply to post by nvprose1


It is amazing.

Can people post a sign on their restaurant that says "Whites Only"?

how about:

"You may be legally sexually assaulted in this movie theater by the owner"

or:

"Before entering this bank you will be beaten and robbed" (actually...)

or:

"State and Federal laws do not apply in this building"

Duhhhhhhh. And guess what.. if TSA is not a law enforcement agency.. and a private security company then they are about to go out of business because molesting your customers is generally not good for business.

reply to post by rwfresh


Star for you, because you nailed the primary point here: there is an end around being done here by the Federal Government by having these being basically Federally mandated, Federally employed security guards and not officers commissioned to enforce the law.

In fact, there is no law for them to enforce here. This is not law. They are acting under an order originating in the Executive branch of government, not the Legislative. This actually further calls into question the legality of what is being done, all the way up to Obama.

This is kind of like Blackwater, another end around the legality of how operations are conducted. Since they are not soldiers, they do not have all the restrictive baggage that soldiers have.

And don't get me started on the IRS. That is one of the primary offenses against the liberty of man that has ever been perpetrated against Americans. And that is saying a lot.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Yes private security they can escort you out since its private property. If you refuse to leave then security can use whatever force neccissary excluding death to remove you. They can also detain and cite you for tresspassing. Resisting security in any manner wil result in more charges against you.

Your "rights" dont extend to private property that does not belong to you.

On a seperate note to a few other posters who think they know what they are talking about.

I find it humerous, yet not surprising, that while you guys think you know what your rights are and how they work (which you dont), and demand others resepct them, you guys have no problem at all jumping on the bandwagon along with Libertarians to arrest all TSA agents.

The question is for what?

You claim you demand the 4th amendment be followed when it comes to you, yet you have no problems throwing it out the window when it comes to dealing with people you guys dont like. People make comments calling them child molesters, thugs etc.

You guys demand the Constitution be followed, yet you have apparently no issues depriving TSA of due process, in addition to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Not only is it sad that you dont know your rights or how the law works, its even worse when you try to claim the moral high grond while essentially behaving in the exact same manner you accuse the Government of doing..

Sad, ignorant and now hypocritical.. Whats even worse is some fo you will attempt to make a distinction between your behavior and that of the Government, doing whatever you can to argue your view is somehow different.

Whats even better is nothing will change because the bulk of you guys only have courage when you are behind your computer. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and actually organize to change the laws you don't like, instead of complaining al the time about how unfair it is?

A day will come where your going to think you know what your rights are, and your going to get your ass kicked in the process by security and charged. Whats sad is you won't know why because you will be to busy crying over what you think your rights are and how they were violated.

You guys really are the pigs from animal farm. All people are equal, but apparently you guys are more equal than others.

I'm not an American, but if I understand the exerpts from your constitution, the people you are calling "sad" and "stupid" are hitting the literal mark, where you seem to miss it. Then again, the law is written in "legal english" - so is somewhat open to interpretation, unless you make the time to understand how law is written.

From what I have seen discussed in this thread, this "TSA" is an illegal entity, operating illegally under the guise of federally endorsed law enforcers. Here, in Australia, we have this problem with nightclub bouncers (not the x-ray's but the frisking) where many MANY bouncers have found themselves behind bars or fined severely, for failing to understand the implicit nature of the laws they were meant to be serving and the people they were meant to be protecting.

p.s. Your arguments have been destroyed with verifiable, easy-to-understand information that is freely available on the web and easily verifiable. Thank you to your American cousins for providing INFORMATION and not just their own personal VIEW.

Peace!

p.p.s - I respect law enforcement officers, they have a terrible job, dealing with the dregs and troubles that arise in society, so my hat goes off to you for that effort you put in. However, calling the very people you protect stupid, is not a way to win votes for best cop 2011 or even a good way to have some one listen to your 'argument'. If this is the kind of attitude you take to work, then I'm not surprised I see arguments escalating to more than they should ever have. As with anywhere and anyone, ultimate power corrupts ultimately.

That goes for Cops, Doctors, Politicians..anyone.... it's sad really.

pull your head out and start listening to the people that the laws (and your job) are there to protect. That is your duty.

reply to post by grey580


That's hilarious, ever since you posted that the shill in question has not responded to the thread.

Papers everybody....papers!
You vill now produce zee papers or be shot.
There is a fine line back there somewhere that we crossed, im not quite sure when it became a police state, but it sure is now.....
There is a whole lot of fear mongering that goes on to keep this fever pitch about terrorists.....
Meanwhile the most terrorising gets done by the good guys it seems.....

If the what the TSA are doing to people isn't considered an ASSAULT on PEOPLE then Why are thousands of People Angry as Hell at the TSA? to the Xfactor who stated it was just dandy to do such a vile act. I think the Morality of some have gone down the toilet due to their jaded consciences' keep insisting that touching anyone inappropriately could possibly be deemed as normal. Anyone who thinks this is Ok is seriously messed
up, or, they enjoy being groped by the TSA and watching others being groped by them too which could only indicate one thing, a very sick and twisted individual with the morals of a slug.

Originally posted by 2012srb

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by 2012srb
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

You speak as if consent to search is the equivalent of consent to assault.

Not at all.. There is a huge difference.

The problem is you guys dont know the difference between a search, a patdown, which is what the TSA does, and an assault.

You don't know what I do and don't know. Don't PRESUME to know me or anyone else here.

That is a very arrogant attitude.

As I stated earlier, in my state, what the TSA does is, technically, fourth degree sexual assault.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by jetlife

 

The TSA is not comissioned law enforcement, and because of that they are not subject to the same laws as commissioned law enforcement is, specifically when dealing with searching people and belongings as they pass through the airport.

If they are not commissioned by our legal system then they are foreign ...which makes them terrorists, subject to much more fun than the average American prisoner...[mouth watering]. Considering the Federal "ANYTHING" is not an actual legal entity, rather a privately owned one,....they should be snatched up and tried as well. Why hasn't anyone done this yet? Can I walk into THEIR banks or legal institutions and just say "from this day forward I own your stuff", and get away with it? If not......then how can THEY get away with it?

I would like to know why Muslim women are treated differently than any other woman going through the security screening? My personal beliefs and values matter just as much as a Muslim woman. I want someone to explain to me why it's OK for me to be man handled, but a Muslim woman does not have to submit to the same thing.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by 2012srb

 

and im telling you that what the TSA does is not asault. Show your statute that supports your argument please.

If there's nothing wrong with what they are doing in the airport, why don't Muslim women have to submit to the same security screenings?

Originally posted by 2012srb
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

If you need to fly, you have no choice but to be groped.

The federal government has instituted legal sexual assault via the TSA.

I don't give them consent to touch my breasts yet they do.

Fourth degree sexual assault.

They don't give a choice. And we have people like xcath sitting here saying "Oh fly a private plane, or DON'T fly at all!" That should NOT BE the choice we are left with. We should be able to fly without being touched on our genitals. If it's illegal outside of an airport, why is it legal inside of the airport? We have registered sex offenders and people in prison for committing the same acts that tsa does every day.

Our president is sick minded, to sit back and allow this to take place to the citizens of this country. Would he have allowed his wife and daughters to be handled in an airport? Give me a break.

This country is sick with panic and "terror". Panic to the point of people saying "yeah sure, touch me down there, just keep me safe, oh please keep me safe.... "

reply to post by Xcathdra


And that is the exact reason I do not fly. It's a good thing I don't have a job that requires me to travel.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by hawkiye

 

Uhm yeah.. Because they are not comissioned, they are not subject to the same requiremnets as law enforcement is. Which includes the 4th amendment.

If you dont want to go through the security checkpoint, dont fly.

Your choice.

Last I knew people who are not commissioned had no right to search a person or to hold them or affect a citizens arrest. So what you are telling us is that sexuallbattery is legal for all who are not comissioned. I think not sexual asult is what it is even a cop cant do it nor can anyother citizen it will never be legal no matter how much you want it to be thank you.

reply to post by jonco6


Guys, you are all flying off the handle.

That X fellow is not here to discuss facts or what not, he is here to defend his federal government. He is not here to understand how you as a civilian feel or know about the law, he is a "police" "officer" and so he stands above you in his own mind. What you are saying might as well be gibberish because if you were holding this conversation with him in real life, he could(and I'm guessing, would) take you away.

There's a point we are reaching and that point entails ignoring people who, obviously, are here to represent the interests of a third party, which in this case, is the employer of the poster known as the federal government.


He was replying with his pre-written points like a madman, under the impression that he was right. And since Grey580 proved EVERY point wrong by sweeping X-fellow's legs from under him, he has not posted in a while.

Originally posted by Thunder heart woman
I want someone to explain to me why it's OK for me to be man handled, but a Muslim woman does not have to submit to the same thing.

Because there is a significantly greater chance that their husband/family will retaliate?

Also, you don't want angry muslims getting on the plane right?

reply to post by Zamini


thanks for the update I have encountered him on other threads and he is usually relentless even after you take his legs out. Did not expect him to give up star for informing me on what was happining and sorry if it seems I was flying off the handle but it had to be the dumbest thing I have ever read.

I fly several times a week. While I don't think that this new security will stop every attack that is planned or attempted, I think it is more effective than what was in place before 9/11.

I have no problem being searched for the privilege of flying. I could care less about the legality. That being said, I think they should hire many times the existing security personnel and search/wand/feel-up EVERY single passenger that gets on a plane. Don't like it, don't fly.

I mean, most libertarians in real life are total wusses. I know many. If I gave the average libertarian the choice of flying in a plane where odds are no one was properly screened, or maybe tell them that an old grandma in a wheelchair was randomly searched.....and the other plane had 100% of the passengers searched....I wonder, if they flew more than one or two times a year, what plane they would choose if no one was going to judge them?

I know my view is unpopular among the conspiracy crowd, where anything and everything against the "man" is instantly and ignorantly embraced, but then again most of those folks don't fly enough to worry about it. So it is easy to sit there in front of their computer and act like they know their butts from a hole in the ground.

Again, you don't have to fly. You can drive. But all public transportation should have 100% screening. Sure, that is expensive, but that is the cost of this modern era. And it avoids all the crybaby libertarian children screaming about political correctness and other things.

Screen no one, or screen everyone. That is the only way. Screen no one and you will see the airline industry go belly up, as folks like me (who are the biggest slice of their customer pie) would not fly if they didn't screen anyone.

And yes, I flew as often as I do now before 9/11. And I had the SAME position before 9/11. I found airport security to be very ridiculous.

reply to post by MainLineThis

I fly several times a week. While I don't think that this new security will stop every attack that is planned or attempted, I think it is wore effective than what was in place before 9/11.

Of course you do, mr. Expert. Take notice of the mr. Expert guys. He flies several times a week so he must understand the laws just fine.

Screen no one, or screen everyone. That is the only way. Screen no one and you will see the airline industry go belly up, as folks like me (who are the biggest slice of their customer pie) would not fly if they didn't screen anyone.

The NSDAP would have been proud of you.

reply to post by Zamini

Of course you do, mr. Expert. Take notice of the mr. Expert guys. He flies several times a week so he must understand the laws just fine.

I know you flew that one time a long while ago for a family vacation, and the rest of the time you spend on the internet claiming to know the answers to life, the universe and everything......

But yeah, I do understand the laws just fine. Better than you because of what I do for a living. The difference is, I don't care. I simply don't care. I could stay behind my keyboard and evangelize about things that don't affect my life like you, however I live in something called reality. And sometimes reality doesn't give two craps about the silly laws you sheepishly cling too.

Kinda like making a school zone a "gun free zone". Thank goodness they did that, that put a stop to all gun related school violence, huh? Either take all the guns away are give everyone a gun. There is no middle ground.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by jetlife

 

The TSA is not comissioned law enforcement, and because of that they are not subject to the same laws as commissioned law enforcement is, specifically when dealing with searching people and belongings as they pass through the airport.

The 4th amendment applies to any and every federal agency.... commissioned law enforcement or not. Period.

Click here for more information.