TSA searches and Professional Boxing.

I have a question, which I don't have time to look into it myself (Hence the Gen post).

Two people get into a street fight outside of a bar witnessed by an officer of the law. Both can be charged for assault whether or not they wish to press charges on each other.

(Taken from the word of someone familiar)

Boxing, of course is commissioned and regulated. People are allowed to engage in physical fights with each other under strict conditions that are set out by the state. In other words, the same act, but it's legal.


Here is where the TSA comes in.

Often the searches they preform come up as topics in the forum. Some people argue that their searches are unconstitutional and others say that because air travel is done through businesses, you are under contract with those businesses to submit to their security protocols.



Given the boxing example, that point is null. A crime is still a crime even with two consenting parties.



So my questions (If the above statements are true)

Are the searches by the TSA constitutional and (if not) who decided unreasonable search and seizure was okay in this case? Where is the oversight?

....

Originally posted by boncho
I have a question, which I don't have time to look into it myself (Hence the Gen post).

Two people get into a street fight outside of a bar witnessed by an officer of the law. Both can be charged for assault whether or not they wish to press charges on each other.

(Taken from the word of someone familiar)

Boxing, of course is commissioned and regulated. People are allowed to engage in physical fights with each other under strict conditions that are set out by the state. In other words,the act, but it's legal.


Here is where the TSA comes in.



Often the searches they preform come up as topics in the forum. Some people argue that their searches are unconstitutional and others say that because air travel is done through businesses, you are under contract with those businesses to submit to their security protocols.

Given the boxing example, that point is null.



So my questions (If the above statements are true)

Are the searches by the TSA constitutional and (if not) who decided unreasonable search and seizure was okay in this case? Where is the oversight?

....

edit on 25-8-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-8-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)

The government says so, that's enough... sadly.

What you should really be researching is whether or not the constitution is worth the parchment it's scribbled on.

Everything I've read over the last 5-10 years suggests that the constitution is consulted about as often as the TV Guide when making law in this country.

Originally posted by DieBravely
What you should really be researching is whether or not the constitution is worth the parchment it's scribbled on.

Everything I've read over the last 5-10 years suggests that the constitution is consulted about as often as the TV Guide when making law in this country.

Do they make TV Guides still?

It's constitutional until someone brings a case before the Supreme Court who will then have the ultimate say. A Federal Court could put a stay on searches if they choose but I don't know of any such lawsuits currently active. I doubt if it could be considered Unconstitutional however.