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.
Originally posted by SFA437
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
Think you're a cpl pages behind which is causing me no end of frustration
Did you read the various contracts for carriage I posted where it specifies, in back & white, that they can refuse you service if you do not submit to a search of your person and belongings?
That is the waiver I am speaking of. If you wish to board THEIR aircraft that they own you must abide by their rules- the same as I would have to abide by yours if I was to ride in your car or visit your home. One cannot do whatever one wishes on the property of another.
As for MAC Space A- my wife got back and forth to Jordan twice and once to Germany without issue. Granted my son was 9 to 12 years old on the various flights over the years but it does work. If the child is too young to fly transatlantic ships still run. Flying is a convenience not a right.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
As I stated before, and will state again, such a "contract" is already a violation.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Several reasons why. One, it assumes that choosing to fly gives them a search warrant.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
No judge, no probable cause, just open season.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Two, people can't even choose to just walk away. No, they are threatened, and arrested, all the time.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
You should take note of how far the TSA people go to publicly humiliate anyone that refuses their little x-rated scanners. Searched, groped, stripped, eve,n, right in full view of all the other passengers. At this rate, they will be doing body cavity searches before long, for all the world to witness. Stripping people of their rights, their privacy, their dignity, just to fly a plane? While, at the same time, knowingly allowing a terrorist aboard? You still haven't addressed that point.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Can you imagine the outrage, if I was to hire a nanny, and told them I got to pat them down every day before they could enter my home, or my car? There is no way that would be allowed. NO WAY. Just because this is a big business, and the fascist Fed is running the show, doesn't make it any different on the topic of the Constitution. If this is allowed to continue, then America is dead.
You would be well within your rights as a property holder to specify a search prior to them entering your home. If the nanny agrees to the searches then you are 100% legal and nobody's 4th Amendment rights get violated because the search was consensual. If the nanny does not agree you could deny her entrance to your home- she could not force her way in, screaming and yelling, then claim you violated her 4th Amendment rights.
Originally posted by Byeluvolk
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
It is not a matter of who thinks up the idea but that the Airline has agreed to it. If they decide not to use TSA they can indeed have a terminal setup for them that does not use the TSA screening service. It may have been invented by the government but it is most certainly sanctioned by the airlines.
Originally posted by Bixxi3
reply to post by Vitchilo
she knew what she was getting in too. If you refuse the body scanners then you get a pat down. Im not saying itsw right but when you buy that ticket your agreeing with the security measures of the airport.
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
reply to post by SFA437
The airlines aren't the ones imposing these regs; the government is. If the airlines did this on their own, no one would fly, lawsuits would be rampant, and the procedures would be changed.
Regardless of some 2009 decision, people have been arrested this year for refusing, and not allowed to simply leave. Check YouTube for the videos; there are tons of them. The TSA is the new Gestapo.
Originally posted by SFA437
Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
reply to post by SFA437
The airlines aren't the ones imposing these regs; the government is. If the airlines did this on their own, no one would fly, lawsuits would be rampant, and the procedures would be changed.
Regardless of some 2009 decision, people have been arrested this year for refusing, and not allowed to simply leave. Check YouTube for the videos; there are tons of them. The TSA is the new Gestapo.
So your contention is that airports had no security prior to the formation of the TSA?
That is funny as there was airline security when I took my first flight in 1977 and when I got stuck in an airport as a cop from 1998-2002. All those security personnel must have been a figment of my imagination
This is how it works-
Airlines have to provide security for the boarding gates according to government regulations (under authority of the Interstate Commerce Clause). They can opt out of having TSA employees (I refuse to call these mouth breathing morons "agents") however this comes at a price. They must hire their own security. It makes financial sense for the airline to allow the government to pick up the tab and keep TSA in place.
When you buy an airline ticket you give permission to the personnel the airline chooses to maintain security to search your person and belongings. These contracts of carriage have been around for 30+ years and people have been patted down and their belongings have been searched WAY before TSA came into being.
The rub was prior to TSA the security people were private employees, could be fired at will, had no collective bargaining and because of this acted like decent people. Now that the security is provided by government employees there is essentially no way to fire them due to civil service regulations (pushed by unions) so they may misbehave as much as they want with no fear of repercussions.
If the parents of the minor child agreed to a frisk prior to entrance yes- it would be legal.