TSA mess and the police

[JLTraveling]

I don't get this; I mean, I don't see bicker doing what you say. He provides his opinion, and generally backs it up with - granted, sometimes lengthy - reasoning/support. On the other hand, people on this thread who don't even currently fly are up in arms about the possibility that there's a chance that if they were to purchase passage on a commercial aircraft that they or a traveling companion might perchance have to experience a more invasive security search than in the past.

Who on this thread doesn't currently fly? I do, LuvOrlando does, skater does. Or, more accurately, we DID right up until these new security measures took effect. But regardless, OceanAnnie's point below is extraordinarily relevant.

Actually the new measures has the potential to impact much more than airline travel.

It's already been in the news that broadening the scope of these measures (to include other modes of transportation) is being considered.

And this forms the absolute crux of my argument, and perhaps others as well. It's all well and good to tell people not to fly if they don't like it. But there is the strong potential that eventually that will spread to "don't leave your house if you don't like it." And that's the slippery slope I've been talking about since day 1, and why I feel that the comparisons to Nazi Germany are particularly relevant here. It's all too easy to accept the next thing and the next and the next, until one day you wake up and realize that your personal line has been crossed, and it's TOO LATE. It's a lot harder to regain liberty than it is to never allow to be taken away in the first place. Ask any population that's ever been oppressed.

 

[JLTraveling]

Not bicker, but bicker just asked that you prove your case - that this is unconstitutional. You have put this forward many times, even suggesting that it will not hold up under the scrutiny of a judge.

You have stated your case as opinion - which is fine - but then later turn around and present it as though that opinion is fact. Then bicker asks you to prove those facts - which can't be done because they are just opinions.

I am of a belief that this is completely constitutional, and have stated why (including legal precedent). Now, that doesn't mean that it will survive the courts, but it is my opinion that it will.

If it does survive the courts, would you be more likely to accept it?

And I've cited legal precedent that supports my opinion that it is unconstitutional and not likely to survive a court challenge.

If it does survive the courts, then I have no choice but to accept it as the current law of the land. Doesn't mean I won't work to have the law changed, but I will abide by the law.

 

[surfgirl]

...snip... I'm more of a moderate myself. ...snip....

... snip... When I first started this I was upset but now I'm just sort of resigned to the fact the TSA won't change and we'll never fly again until the wars are over. ... snip...

Since this thread is "yours", I'll share my perspective. You may view yourself as a moderate, but you've taken a clearly "black" (or "white" ... depending on perspective!) position on this. I'm sorry to hear that your children will suffer from your inflexibility since they no longer have the ability to visit the Caribbean, Europe, Australia, Asia, etc. It seems that you have the financial ability and desire to travel, but I guess this is a sword you will die on.

...snip...
We can try but the two can't be separated, we're all flawed which is why respect is essential

Yet you can't accept that TSA agents have made a few mistakes ? Name the profession and there are a few bad apples in there... doctors ? incompetent ones. lawyers ? sharks. priests? ones guilty of child molestation. bank managers? embezzlers. government employees? guilty of taking bribes. politicians? all of the above! Does that mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater ? At what point do you become paranoid and never leave your house ?

What exactly is wrong with you ... snip...

It wasn't logic which caused me to get each of my kids a $3,000 first haircut at the Barber Shop on Main Street in WDW .....snip...

You just don't get it do you, you and your little group just don't get it at all.

I'll agree, multiple $3,000 haircuts are NOT logical. However, if they were part of a larger vacation, then it might make sense.

What don't "you and your little group" not get ? That you won't fly ? That you disagree ? That others can accept the changes without getting their knickers in a twish (love that phrase!) ?

I guess I am confused as to what some of us "don't get" ?

I don't agree with the changes, but I view them as a minor inconvenience. However, since I posted my most intimidating security experiences a ways back, it is all from my perspective. And my perspective is that it isn't a sword I'll die on. I'd rather travel! (Actually, I hate the travel piece, its the "being there" piece I like!)

I understand that there is a subset of the population who doesn't like the changes, and I agree that there are kinks they need to work out, but I find it ironic that the loudest screamers are the most infrequent flyers.

ymmv. (and I'm sure it will!!)

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

And I've cited legal precedent that supports my opinion that it is unconstitutional and not likely to survive a court challenge.

I know, as have I to support the opposite, which is why I say that it is opinion (your side and mine). It is far from fact.

If it does survive the courts, then I have no choice but to accept it as the current law of the land. Doesn't mean I won't work to have the law changed, but I will abide by the law.

That is what I wanted to know - this really isn't about whether or not it is constitutional to you. You simply don't like it. Fair enough.

 

[JLTraveling]

I know, as have I to support the opposite, which is why I say that it is opinion (your side and mine). It is far from fact.



That is what I wanted to know - this really isn't about whether or not it is constitutional to you. You simply don't like it. Fair enough.

Um, please don't put words in my mouth. I don't believe that this is constitutional, as put forth in the actual Constitution of the United States. I believe that the Supreme Court has the authority to interpret the Constitution and set precedents by which we must all abide. However, I also believe that the Supreme Court, like any other governmental body, is comprised of human beings. Should the Supreme Court rule in a manner that I believe goes against the letter or the spirit of the Constitution, I have the right to use my vote and my grassroots organizational ability to influence the future makeup of the Supreme Court. As long as I do so lawfully and peaceably, I am permitted to work to effect change.

So you are conflating two separate issues. I can respect the authority of the Supreme Court. I can also believe that an issue is fundamentally unconstitutional, regardless of whether or not the Supreme Court agrees with me. It has nothing to do with my personal likes or dislikes. It has everything to do with my belief in constitutionality versus unconstitutionality, and that slippery slope that you have continually glossed over.

 

[JLTraveling]

Since this thread is "yours", I'll share my perspective. You may view yourself as a moderate, but you've taken a clearly "black" (or "white" ... depending on perspective!) position on this. I'm sorry to hear that your children will suffer from your inflexibility since they no longer have the ability to visit the Caribbean, Europe, Australia, Asia, etc. It seems that you have the financial ability and desire to travel, but I guess this is a sword you will die on.

That's so ridiculous. At what point did an airplane become the only possible choice for reaching the Caribbean, Europe, Australia, Asia, etc.? I must have missed the memo stating that ships no longer access those places. You go ahead and take your naked scans and gropes for the privilege of squeezing into a tiny seat with no leg room. I'll walk through a metal detector carrying my coffee and wearing my shoes en route to a fantastic adventure on a freighter ship or a luxury cruise on an ocean liner, where someone cooks fabulous meals 24 hours a day and waits on me hand and foot while I kick back and do my job with a cocktail in my hand and the ocean breeze in my face. We'll both get to the same place in the end, but I bet I have more fun getting there.

 

[skater]

Um, please don't put words in my mouth. I don't believe that this is constitutional, as put forth in the actual Constitution of the United States. I believe that the Supreme Court has the authority to interpret the Constitution and set precedents by which we must all abide. However, I also believe that the Supreme Court, like any other governmental body, is comprised of human beings. Should the Supreme Court rule in a manner that I believe goes against the letter or the spirit of the Constitution, I have the right to use my vote and my grassroots organizational ability to influence the future makeup of the Supreme Court. As long as I do so lawfully and peaceably, I am permitted to work to effect change.

So you are conflating two separate issues. I can respect the authority of the Supreme Court. I can also believe that an issue is fundamentally unconstitutional, regardless of whether or not the Supreme Court agrees with me. It has nothing to do with my personal likes or dislikes. It has everything to do with my belief in constitutionality versus unconstitutionality, and that slippery slope that you have continually glossed over.

 

[DMRick]

We cruise often. We'll be leaving in 10 days for a two week cruise. But most of the time we have to fly to the place that the cruise ship leaves from (it's a long trip from NY to LA via car). I certainly don't want to give up cruising and I don't want to keep going to the same places because of the ports I can drive to. But you are right, there are some places you can get to, if you have the time to drive to the ports. We are cruising in May to England, however, we have to fly to Ft Lauderdale from NY (driving would really eat up time) and the cruise is over 2 weeks (it takes several days to get there, and if you are coming back, that's several more days, so it really eats up the vacation). But you are right, you can travel via cruise ship, if you don't mind the long drive to get to some ports. I do get to enjoy the cruise, so that is a perk.

That said, I would be very surprised if some of this doesn't end up being a part of cruising as well. I actually wish it would. Being out in the middle of an ocean, I'd like to feel safer, knowing the most was being done, to assure me and mind safety on a cruise.

That's so ridiculous. At what point did an airplane become the only possible choice for reaching the Caribbean, Europe, Australia, Asia, etc.? I must have missed the memo stating that ships no longer access those places. You go ahead and take your naked scans and gropes for the privilege of squeezing into a tiny seat with no leg room. I'll walk through a metal detector carrying my coffee and wearing my shoes en route to a fantastic adventure on a freighter ship or a luxury cruise on an ocean liner, where someone cooks fabulous meals 24 hours a day and waits on me hand and foot while I kick back and do my job with a cocktail in my hand and the ocean breeze in my face. We'll both get to the same place in the end, but I bet I have more fun getting there.

 

[surfgirl]

That's so ridiculous. At what point did an airplane become the only possible choice for reaching the Caribbean, Europe, Australia, Asia, etc.? I must have missed the memo stating that ships no longer access those places. You go ahead and take your naked scans and gropes for the privilege of squeezing into a tiny seat with no leg room. I'll walk through a metal detector carrying my coffee and wearing my shoes en route to a fantastic adventure on a freighter ship or a luxury cruise on an ocean liner, where someone cooks fabulous meals 24 hours a day and waits on me hand and foot while I kick back and do my job with a cocktail in my hand and the ocean breeze in my face. We'll both get to the same place in the end, but I bet I have more fun getting there.

Go for it! The reality is this (for European travel):
1) there are few ships doing it
2) it adds 10-14 days to the trip
3) it is at least double the cost of a flight (about $1,400 - $1,700 sharing a cabin each way)

I don't know the percentage of people taking ships across, but I'd be willing to bet it is less than 1% of the population that visits Europe (and even that I'd bet would be generous).

I'm speaking in generalities and generally, people don't think of taking a ship to visit Europe.

 

[eliza61]

So you're saying that feminine pads DON'T show up as anomalies on the scan/ become apparent during pat downs? That the article is incorrect?

I'm not trying to challenge you, just curious what you were told on this issue by the TSA agents that you know.

Nope, I'm saying that the TSA agents don't give a flying hoot. they are looking at the overall scan of the body and since they will be in a totally different room why spread the story that TSA agents will somehow be questioning women about whether or not they will have to discuss it with the agent? The poster made illusions that she will now have to discuss whether or not she is wearing a kotex.
That is really stretching the truth. the TSA agent is not going to coming running out saying "maam are you on your period"? and that is exactly the sort of innuendo and fear tatic she meant to spread.

As to what the agents told me. Basically that they pretty much don't going around trying to "guess, assume or think" about parts of the passengers anatomy. they look for some thing very out of the ordinary. And they usually launch into their own horror stories about having to touch, nasty, germy, smelling John P. Public. how they get spit on, cursed at, and other lovely things all those "put upon" travelers do.

 

[JLTraveling]

Go for it! The reality is this (for European travel):
1) there are few ships doing it
2) it adds 10-14 days to the trip
3) it is at least double the cost of a flight (about $1,400 - $1,700 sharing a cabin each way)

I don't know the percentage of people taking ships across, but I'd be willing to bet it is less than 1% of the population that visits Europe (and even that I'd bet would be generous).

I'm speaking in generalities and generally, people don't think of taking a ship to visit Europe.

But one could always choose to simply take the Queen Mary 2 from New York to London. It adds a week each way to the trip and often sells for as low as $600 per person. From London, it is extremely easy to access any part of Europe by rail, and is relatively inexpensive.

Of course most people don't think of it, and some can't spare the time. But you weren't speaking in generalities when you told LuvOrlando that she was choosing not to travel because she chose not to fly. That was the same type of hyperbole that I've repeatedly been accused of in this thread. Sometimes you just have to think outside the box to accomplish your goals.

 

[eliza61]

The new TSA measures introduce complicated and tangled legal issues.

Our legal system isn't known for efficiency. The legalities will be interesting to follow.

I was just wondering if some one put in a lawsuit yet?

 

[eliza61]

eliza61 is incorrect! Pads, diapers or adult diapers do show up on the scans and extra screening is needed.

I find it sad that people think this intrusive screening keeps them safe. Anyway, waiting for the next thing TSA is going to do in the name of security.

Well I guess I would have been wrong if that was what I had said but hey, this definitely is not the first time I've been wrong or misquoted, Its a pretty safe bet that it won't be the last.

Truthfully I'm one of the people who find it a big non issue. When I travel for for pleasure, I see a trip that interest me, I see if I can afford it (time and money wise) and then I book. I rarely worry about what airport security is going to be like and when it's time for me to travel my number one thought is how can I get through security quickly.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I was just wondering if some one put in a lawsuit yet?

According to different articles I've read, there are numerous lawsuits from across the nation.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Um, please don't put words in my mouth...

You have tackled this issue from every possible angle, only one of which being the constitutionality. It is natural for me to believe that you have other reasons to dislike this law and I find it hard to believe otherwise.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

According to different articles I've read, there are numerous lawsuits from across the nation.

I have heard that but haven't seen a case cited that addresses the constitutionality of the law, yet. If one has not been filed, it will be - of that I have no doubt.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I have heard that but haven't seen a case cited that addresses the constitutionality of the law, yet. If one has not been filed, it will be - of that I have no doubt.

The ACLU has filed based on unconstitutionality.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

The ACLU has filed based on unconstitutionality.

I thought that the ACLU dropped that suit after the TSA changed its policy?

 

[OceanAnnie]

I thought that the ACLU dropped that suit after the TSA changed its policy?

Sorry, I think you are right.

 

[eliza61]

This is from an article in todays Philadelphia Inquirer. Usually people link stories about the TSA raping their 82 year old grandmother. I found this one to refresing simply because it says simply "People, get a grip"


Most of the time I think I'm in sync with the rest of the world. And then there are the times when I'm not.
Security scanners.

I just watched the TV news, wherein everybody is outraged about the new body scanners and pat-downs as they go through airport security. I'm not criticizing those people, but I travel all the time and I don't feel that way at all.

On the contrary.

Scan me. Search me. Bend me over. Stick your finger in my ear. Do anything you absolutely have to do.

I'll get over it.

Here's what I won't get over:

Being dead.

Yes, I know, the body scanners are an invasion of privacy. Yes, I have gone through them at three airports so far. And yes, TSA guys have already seen my 10-year-old underwire and my saggy white Carter's, not to mention my butt mole.

And you know what?

I lived.

They may not have. At least, they have indigestion or nightmares, and I feel for them.

In fact, I'd like to bring a little sunshine into the life of those TSA types. All they get to do is look at driver's license photos all day long. Can you imagine how much that stinks, especially given how we all look on our driver's licenses?

So here's what I say: Check it out, TSA dude. Knock yourself out. If looking at my scanned body does it for you, you have bigger problems than terrorists.

I've also had the new and improved pat-down, and I'm a fan.

Er, I mean, I'm not opposed.

Was it intrusive? You bet. I've had dates that didn't get as far, and they'd bought me dinner. I felt embarrassed, giggly, and silly. How could I not? Someone I hardly know got to second base with me, in Terminal A. And you know how long it lasted?

Three minutes.

I forget, how long are you dead for?

Oh, right.

Now, I'm betting that most of the people bothered by the security scanning are women, at least they were on the news. It makes sense to me. We're congenitally modest, and even if we're not, we tend to worry about someone running their fingertips over our muffintops.

I feel the same way. This would be a good time to let you know that I sucked in my stomach during my pat-down. I wanted my TSA date to think I was thin. He might not ask me out again.

The women on the TV news said that the pat-downs had no "dignity," but here's what I have to say to my fellow sisters, which might be a paradox:

Remember when you gave birth? Remember when you were in labor? Remember when you were in the hospital gown, with your butt hanging out and your legs in the air? Plus you were at least 50 pounds heavier and retaining more water than most swimming pools.

If you were dignified before you gave birth, you cannot tell me that labor and delivery didn't cure you. Half the world saw you naked and as undignified as it gets. And, oh yeah, another human being popped out of your body.

Yikes.

I never understand people who say that childbirth is beautiful. This would be another time I'm out of sync. Childbirth is not beautiful. Children are beautiful. Childbirth is disgusting. Anyone who says otherwise has never met a placenta.

I'm surprised ob-gyns don't have post-traumatic distress from seeing a few of those a day.

The only thing we can all agree on is that childbirth is a miracle, but that doesn't change my analysis. As miracles go, it's easily the most disgusting. For example, the parting of the Red Sea would be cool to see. Also pulling a sword out of a stone. And most other miracles.

Especially getting on a plane and getting off safely, all of us, forever.

That's the one I want to see.Read more: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/colu...on__be_my_guest.html?page=2&c=y#ixzz16bd7dExv
Watch sports videos you won't find anywhere else