Why do so many people have an issue with the TSA?

reply to post by ComeFindMe


sorry, those times are no less real to Americans. We fought your countries tyranny and vowed to never let it happen again. I think it inappropriate for you to give more than a passing opinion about what is the core of my countries principles.

Every tyrant wishes to usher in his view of the world as he sees it. They always throw away the norms and customs of the past that preserve a people and their identity.

I don't like the monarchy system but would never speak against what you people seem to love.

God save your queen and our constitutionally protected freedoms.

reply to post by ComeFindMe


you can have an opinion, but considering that your view is a European view and we are talking about the fruit of a war between our people, your opinion carries little weight. You can't begin to understand us unless you live amongst us for a while and understand this is something we have fought and died for.

god save your queen and our constitutionally protected freedoms.

The funny thing is that not one of you dingbats sees the real elephant in the room. This is why the media pretends they are on your side in disgust at the tsa crap.

TSA is a govt bureau. You do NOT have a contract with them. You have a contract with the airline. They are allowed to contract with another service provider for security, AND PAY FOR IT. TSA is paid for with taxes. YOUR MONEY PAYS FOR IT. Not the airline. The whole thing is a giant bait and switch. They are stealing your money, and telling you about it. There is no "safety" involved. The "security personnel" are mouth breathing morons. Anyone could fool them. And they steal stuff all the time.

I've probably been on a lot more plane flights than most of you. I've brought highly illegal items that would make your hair stand on end onto planes. Many times. And fooled my way through customs and immigration in many countries as well. These high school dropout morons are not going to catch ME, I will baffle them with bulls4it and talk circles around them until their little peabrains shut down. And I am a rank amateur. If these "terrists" really existed, this would not even slow them down.

The main point is, you are being robbed of a lot of money. OVER EIGHT BILLION A YEAR. Let em grope ya if you want but understand that you are actually paying for it. By force. Basically extortion.

Let's put it this way: there are about thirty million flights a year in the US. If some airlines would add 250 to their ticket price, to pay for all the "security", while others said, "Hey, we might get highjacked, but you save 250 bucks! And no anal probes!" what do you think would happen? Huh?

Throw in free drinks and no stewies over thirty, and that airline would TAKE OVER.

Instead, you pay for it whether you like it or not.

reply to post by FoxMulder91




I like being safe. I do not get on airplanes, because I like being safe. I do not approve of the annoying searches, because if you want to be safe, stay off of airplanes.

Might I suggest to those who are doing much "Grr! Grr! Gnashing of Teeth!!" while "And I'm Proud to Be An American" is blasting in the background:

Calm down, and have some dip.

To the OP: the reason everyone's having kittens over TSA is because they are spoiled. You see, here in America we have come to believe that our personal liberties are tantamount to the Holy effing Grail--nay, scratch that, to the very shroud that Christ Himself was wrapped in before he rose again.

You see, as an American, my personal liberties trump the common good, because Common sounds like Commune, as in Communism. And if there's one thing Captain America hates more than Hitler, Satan, and Justin Bieber dressed in skinny jeans, it's pinko Commies! Grr! Gnashing of teeth!

Also: being subjected to the humiliating act of a pat down where some minimum wage minority with a uniform and a rubber glove--who probably doesn't even speak American!--is an indignity no red blooded, Apple Pie lovin' patriot should have to suffer through! These are my lawful rights you're treading on here, people! The Constitution says so! (Well, I think it does. I only know "We the People....")

Also: those new-fangled x-ray machines probably cause cancer andbecausetheycanseehowsmallofapenisimighthave and some queer guy in some hidden booth is probably beating it to my nekkid x-ray body in the 20 seconds I have to stand there with my arms up in the air. And what kind of message does that send to my kid over there?

Yessir. Here in America we take our freedoms seriously. We'd rather all 355 men, women and children on board go down in a blaze of glory than have to give up just one of our inalienable rights while we sit there looking stupid in the security line.

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by CaptChaos

 

Firstly, i'm not an American - not that it matters, as you seem adept at jumping to conclusions. I have never said that the Constitution is 'just' a piece of paper, or that the old rules cannot possibly still even mean anything, or that new common sense rules are better. If you think I have, then please quote me - otherwise, accept that you have misrepresented my posts.

Please read comments before trying to mount a criticism in the future. To help, i'll re-iterate - the Constitution was created in a much simpler time - to expect it to still be 100% applicable nowadays in unreasonable - any sane person could see that. There are, inevitably, going to be situations that seem to contradict or contravene the Constituition - but they are only a reflection of the times we live in now, not the times we used to live in.

Er, uh, lemme quote ya here, then: Do you not think it is equally as ignorant to presume that a document written over 200 years ago can still be just as applicable now as it was then? That it is above reproach? That because in this instance, as it benefits you, you choose to have it 'supercede' common-sense rules you don't agree with?

If this does not say that new "common sense rules" are better, and the Constitution is "not as applicable now as it was then" or in other words, "does not apply any more", well, then what the hell do you THINK you are babbling here? Since you are not American, who cares WHAT you think, anyway? You don't have a horse in this race, so why are you butting in?

Originally posted by LastProphet527

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by VictorVonDoom

 

Both your points add nothing to this discussion, as i've made clear.

Your precious Constitution allows no room for common sense - given there is a precendent for individuals trying to hijack planes, patdowns /scanners act as both a deterrent and an excellent way to identify such individuals.

Expecting a document thats over two hundred years old to still be just as applicable now is frankly, deluded.

TextExpecting a document thats over two hundred years old to still be just as applicable now is frankly, deluded.

Extrmely deluded if you ask me.

OMFG I just puked in my mouth

reply to post by camus154


so you mock us and expect some form of respect. It is like you crap on the torah saying it is all mumbo jumbo and then ask the Jewish kid for a high five.

I am sorry some things are to be respected. If not it's all fair game. This is not some form of vanity or BS it is our F-ing constitution. It is what made us the envy of the world for a while so much so that other countries copied it almost to the letter.
You can act like a kid but I will not dishonor my people.

Oh and that sarcasm is more readily applied to the idiots calling us bad Americans because we like to defend what our patriots spilled their blood trying to secure.

You can move you know. Dictators love new arrivals.
No mumbo jumbo there, just might makes right.

reply to post by kozmo


First. I am not championing the TSA. Only pointing out rational thought.

This particular form of search is called Administartive Search...

research.lawyers.com...

It is of interest that a court recently found that a TSA agent who confiscated 4 False Passports during a search was found to be in the legal wrong. The TSA is restricted to only searching for and confiscating materials that would endanger other passengers. If they find drugs for example, they can let the police know, but they can't confiscate or take action.

Administrative Search....Just like when you go to a ballgame or concert, and believe me the person that pats you down before a Ballgame, does not work directly for the Ball team...they are contracted to do security.

I am just confused by those who try and equate a non-criminal, optional search to someone comming into your home without a warrant or searching your person without probable cause. It is not the same...at all..

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by VictorVonDoom

 

Both your points add nothing to this discussion, as i've made clear.

Your precious Constitution allows no room for common sense - given there is a precendent for individuals trying to hijack planes, patdowns /scanners act as both a deterrent and an excellent way to identify such individuals.

Expecting a document thats over two hundred years old to still be just as applicable now is frankly, deluded.

Well, then, let me make a couple more points. Who knows, maybe I can make a worthwhile contribution.

First, my precious Constitution is what gives the Federal Government the legal authority to govern this nation. We're not some monarchy dominated by an inbred bloodline. If we are going to scrap the Constitution as an archaic document, we should recognize that the President, Congress, and the Supreme Court no longer have legal authority to govern, and they should be done away with. Give them and the Federal Reserve the appropriate 13 knot retirement plan and lets start fresh.

Second, I'll grant that the US Constitution was not written for "common sense." It was written to insure that US citizens would not be subject to the whimsical tyranny associated with forms of government like monarchies and dictatorships. It was written to define and limit the powers of government. It is not supposed to be a minor annoyance for power hungry rulers, it's supposed to be the brick wall that stops them in their tracks. The fact that some people abuse liberty does not give the government the right to take that liberty from others. If we wanted to follow a king who's word was law, we could have remained British subjects. We chose freedom.

Third, I'll stipulate that the Constitution is old. Maybe not as old as the bloodlines of some monarchies, but it's getting there. However, I personally believe that the principles behind the US Constitution are timeless. Simply put, some things are necessary to insure a free society. A man must be able to say what he believes is true, regardless of how the government feels about it. A man must have the ability to defend himself and his loved ones against an oppressive government. A man should be free from unwarranted harrassment by his government. A man should not have to worry about the government coming to his home and stealing his possessions. I could go on, but I think the point is made.

I can understand how some people from other countries may not understand what our Constitution is all about. I've travelled to a few countries in Europe and the Middle East, and it's a very enlightening experience. Speaking with people in other countries and really listening to their views on a wide range of topics gives you an appreciation for other countries and teaches tolerance for people at home. But I think you have to live in the US for a few years to truly appreciate what the US Constituion is and what it's supposed to do. For me, I guess it's a lot like a religion. I believe in it. I preach it. I consider it as binding to our government as Christians consider the 10 Commandments binding to their religious leaders.

Maybe I'm a little irrational in that regard, but I would still prefer that the law of the land to be contained in a document like the Constitution than to have the law of the land subject to the whims of whomever might be sitting on a throne at any particular time.

Originally posted by Evolutionsend
reply to post by FoxMulder91

 

I like being safe. I do not get on airplanes, because I like being safe. I do not approve of the annoying searches, because if you want to be safe, stay off of airplanes.

If you like being safe, stay out of cars. Airplanes are thousands of times safer than driving a car. You are far more likely to be struck by lightning while standing outside. So if you want to be "safe", don't ever get in a car, or leave your house. Then you will be "safe".

Odds of being struck by lightning in a given year (reported deaths + injuries)


1/1,000,000

Odds of being struck by lightning in a given year (estimated total deaths + injuries)


1/775,000

Odds of being struck in your lifetime (Est. 80 years)


1/10,000

www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov...

Odds of being involved in a fatal accident Odds of being on an airline flight which results in at least one fatality Odds of being killed on a single airline flight Top 30 airlines with the best accident rates 1 in 11.4 million Top 30 airlines with the best accident rates 1 in 29.4 million Bottom 25 with the worst accident rates 1 in 1.3 million Bottom 25 with the worst accident rates 1 in 1.7 million

planecrashinfo.com...

Originally posted by BIHOTZ
reply to post by camus154

 

so you mock us and expect some form of respect. It is like you crap on the torah saying it is all mumbo jumbo and then ask the Jewish kid for a high five.

Let's clear some things up here.

1. I'm one of "you". That's right, I'm an American. And you know what? Proud of it too! I've even served my country (I bet your head just exploded).

See, I love freedom and what our country stands for just as much as you do. I just choose not to use patriotism as an excuse to launch a slippery slope argument against the TSA because, in reality, we all think we're being treated like criminals and that just pisses us off, doesn't it?

Yes, I love America. I love our freedoms. I love what we stand for. And I absolutely hate how indignant and entitled all of us seem to be.

2. I don't expect anything from you. Not sure where you got that from.

reply to post by camus154


2 separate arguments.

Security is good.

the constitution is good.

The TSA should be involved in security, fine. The way they do so is in question. The fact that it may be violating our founding principles brings the question if there is not a better way of operating

1. is more effective
2. doesn't violate what we swore never to violate.


I see it as a cash cow for a few jerks.

edit:
didn't you swear to protect the constitution when you served?
are you doing so now?

I take my vows seriously or I don't make them at all. I keep my word.

Originally posted by BIHOTZ
2 separate arguments.

Security is good.

the constitution is good.

The TSA should be involved in security, fine. The way they do so is in question. The fact that it may be violating our founding principles brings the question if there is not a better way that

1. is more effective
2. doesn't violate what we swore never to violate.


I see it as a cash cow for a few jerks.

Ok, and now I think we can get somewhere.

On the rights side of things, I don't believe it's violating our rights. But I'm going to be 100% honest with you. I'm not a constitutional lawyer. That means I really don't know. But here's how I look at it. Meh, does it really do me any harm? Not really. Just get me through security so I can hurry up and wait on the other side.

Now, regarding how much this costs and is it even really effective? Ok, now THERE I can get on board. It DOES piss me off that I've walked on board with questionable items myself.

edit:
didn't you swear to protect the constitution when you served?
are you doing so now?

I take my vows seriously or I don't make them at all. I keep my word.

Yes, I did. Not sure where you're going with that?

Originally posted by camus154

Now, regarding how much this costs and is it even really effective? Ok, now THERE I can get on board. It DOES piss me off that I've walked on board with questionable items myself.

agreed.

edit:
didn't you swear to protect the constitution when you served?
are you doing so now?

I take my vows seriously or I don't make them at all. I keep my word.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I did. Not sure where you're going with that?

well the constitution protects us from illegal search and seizure.

it is wrong based on that to search every person indiscriminately.

I am not an expert either, I have just read that enough times that it sticks out.

edit:

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.

www.policebrutalitylawyer.com...

reply to post by FoxMulder91


Because it is a scam based on the lie of 9/11.
Real terrorists would find a work around.
Fake CIA/Mossad terrorists would also find a work around.
The TSA punishment is all part of backing up the official lie with job creation and big brotherness.

Then I think the real question is, is this a "reasonable" search.

My guess is yes because an airport is a public, not private, place, it's not indiscriminate in that you aren't stopped just walking through the airport but rather you must pass through a gate to get to a specific area, and it's for the express purpose of ensuring safety. You also have to go through metal detectors to get into federal buildings...

reply to post by camus154


it is pretty clear.

"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."

you can't say everyone that will pass through this gate since everyone will. That is searching without probably cause.
Unless the government is saying that we are all suspicious of being terrorists.

reply to post by FoxMulder91


Unlike Canada, our government no longer functions correctly. There is no faith in it since they have proven countless times how inept they are. They daily run us into the ground and no one is even putting on the brakes!

I suppose if the TSA was to have prevented an actual terror attack or even prevent actual bombers from getting through security we would not have so many issues with the TSA. They are a joke! Google how the Times Square bomber almost got away! He got thru TSA so how good are they??? A one way, recently purchased ticket didn't sound any alarms... JOKES!!!

OK, I think the biggest problem is that the TSA's actions are unconstitutional in our country - and NO one should ever allow the government to invade their privacy.

The second biggest problem is that it is run with government workers and I imagine even in Canada you realize how inept government workers are....( besides those jobs called for in the Constitution - like our Marines!)

Congress, while called for in the Constitution, is a result of the mostly-ignorant American population. It is worse than the TSA in MY mind since there is little accountability and they write the laws that allow the TSA to do what they do...

Oh yeah, Ron Paul 2012!