Is the TSA going too far when it makes a 4-year-old disabled boy remove his leg braces?

Pat-downs
http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/pat_downs.shtm

For Travelers

What triggers a pat-down?

Pat-downs are used to resolve alarms at the checkpoint, including those triggered by metal detectors and AIT units. Pat-downs are also used when a person opts out of AIT screening in order to detect potentially dangerous and prohibited items. Because pat-downs are specifically used to resolve alarms and prevent dangerous items from going on a plane, the vast majority of passengers will not receive a pat-down at the checkpoint.

What can I do to prevent an alarm at the security checkpoint?

The majority of pat-downs occur when a passenger alarms either the metal detector or the AIT unit. To reduce this circumstance, the most important thing you can do is take everything out of your pockets before you go through screening. Also, when traveling, avoid wearing clothes with a high metal content, and put heavy jewelry on after you go through security.

What do I do during a pat-down?

All passengers have important rights during a pat-down. You have the right to request the pat-down be conducted in a private room and you have the right to have the pat-down witnessed by a person of your choice. All pat-downs are only conducted by same-gender officers. The officer will explain the pat-down process before and during the pat-down. If you have a medical device, please inform the officer.

Will children receive pat-downs?

Transportation Security Officers will work with parents to resolve any alarms at the checkpoint. If required, a child may receive a modified pat-down. Parents are encouraged to ensure their children have taken all items out of their pockets as they go through the security checkpoint.

As a parent, I'm ready to go crazy if the TSA wants to give my kids a pat down. If it wasn't the government, those pat downs would be considered sexual abuse. I'm not 100% convinced the radiation is safe and I'm not thrilled about some stranger seeing my kids virtually naked. From what I've read, the scans are so detailed you can see beads of sweat on a person.

As paranoid American- kids are exactly the type of people the terrorists will start using to blow us up. I'm outraged that they're considering special rules for women in hijab... that they wouldn't be subject to those hard core searches.

I don't have an answer. I don't like either option- scans or getting felt up. But at the same time we need security. I think the US needs to start profiling. Every other world power does it, but for some reason the US is above it. We're too worried about pissing people off to do it. The problem is the US always has a knee jerk reaction- the leaders think "how can we stop that last attack from being repeated?" instead of thinking "How can we stop the NEXT attack?" The terrorists change their tactics quickly, we're too busy worrying about the old ways.

ETA:  Obviously from the video the TSA doesn't take Special Needs into account.  What about an autistic kid who can't tolerate the touch of another person?  A pat down could be an incredibly traumatizing experience.  How can the TSA give exemptions to hijab but be so inconsiderate of kids with leg braces or other handicaps?  It's unbelievable.

If it keeps me safe, if it keeps my kids safe, if it keeps you and your kids safe. Pat away. I'm good with it. If your not, find another mode of transportation.

I agree that this circumstance with the child with braces wasn't handled correctly. You can't reason with stupid.

my kids and I are flying home in March...they will have to arrest me before I allow them to feel up on my babies...not gonna happen...

Really, my dad and uncles used to tell stories about mothers and grandmothers handing their crying babies to soldiers in Vietnam with grenades in their diapers. I say check everybody. I'll just be happy to get my kids home for a visit in one piece.

Amendment IV
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.

So now wanting to fly is probable cause for a search? I'd be happy to find another mode of transportation, the question is will the government provide transportation on a ship back to the US when the time comes to leave. Doubt it. So my choice is stay in Japan, or subject myself to unreasonable search by the TSA?

Why don't we just require everyone to fly naked? And do a full cavity search before you're allowed in the airport? At what point do you say enough is enough?

I believe Benjamin Franklin said it best, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

My answer... Covertly issue 1/3 of the passengers a 9mm with 2 rounds, that way if someone gets out of line there are dozens of armed personnel onboard that can take care of the threat. Is it a perfect plan? Not by a long shot. Is it better than violating the rights of HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of US citizens that just want (or need) to travel quickly? Heck yes.

Ok, that was a really well debated point, touche' . I just don't feel like I'm giving up my civil liberties by being patted down or scanned at the airport to insure some portion of security. I wonder if you could poll the people who were killed in any of the 9/11 attacks what their thoughts would be. I'm sure it will be mixed.

From what I've read, the scans are so detailed you can see beads of sweat on a person.

Wouldnt you want that job? Just sit there all day, and examine all the bodies walking by...

LOL, Adam, I think it would be just like a gynecologist or a urologist, they really don't give a damn about what your embarrassed about, they're just looking for explosives, and not the kind that excites your spouse

:-) Why thank you tulips! I do try to have a valid point every now and then. But there are times I'm just out to rile people up... This is actually NOT one of them!

I can't see how being frisked (the same procedure that is done when someone is arrested, maybe even more in depth) or by submitting to the scan (essentially the same thing as a strip search that is done when you arrive at jail) can be viewed as anything other than a violation of the 4th amendment? I would EXPECT those things to happen if I was being arrested or had some other legal action pending against me.

But I haven't been arrested, or been to jail; in fact I've held security clearances and been privy to classified information. So why should I have to be violated (either with the scan or the frisk) to board a plane?

Adam... Have you seen some one the people in the US? Most of them I wouldn't care to see in anything less than baggy sweat pants and a loose sweater!

I believe some of the most notorious political criminals in history have had the highest security clearances. And I think it's just a lot faster for all of us to just get the pat down and walk threw the scanner. This isn't about civil liberties it's about national security. I'm just saying that, personally, I'm will to give a little on the issue. Nobody is coming onto my home, I'm going to the airport.

I actually agree with Tulips here.

Frisk / Scan / Pat Down, Cavity Search, I dont care what you do, but keep the plane safe whenever I am onboard.

People are getting so clever to hide explosive liquid into printer cartridges.. Come on Printer Cartridges!!! So whats next? I under stand with the original post, with the 4 year old. His legs of course triggered the metal detectors. So why not bring him into a private room, and get him examined privately, and not on the open floor. I am embarrassed everytime I go back to the USA and see employees working the check-points (scanning), and how they operate. I am no expert, but I am vigilent, and very observant. I see things they do wrong just standing there for a few minutes in line. How is there no oversight for someone managing these employees. The supervisor in the above case, should of been tested and evaluated on handling different situations. I never would of allowed him to just go through with his parents word, "Oh my son is handicap.... He has steel braces for his legs" That may of worked 10-20 years ago, but not anymore. Everyone needs to be checked. Everyone!

Adam, I wanna fly on the same plane as you! I'd be happier if everyone had to get naked and shower before the plane took off anyways. Not to long ago a lady took her shoe off and cut her toenails. HELLO!!!!

Posted By tulipsonly on 28 Nov 2010 06:13 PM
If it keeps me safe, if it keeps my kids safe, if it keeps you and your kids safe. Pat away. I'm good with it. If your not, find another mode of transportation.

Wrong. For those willing to erode their constitutional rights for the appearance of safety, you find another way to travel. There are worse things than that minuscule risk of a terrorist attack. Forcing my kids to grow up in a totalitarian state where you must "show your papers" and submit to a strip search for the sake of travel is far more frightening than the potential terrorist. And yet, this is the direction we're headed.  Live free or die is not just a slogan.

lol. You show your "papers" every time your cross into another country and have for a very long time and so far I've never been strip searched. I think it's all a little alarmist on the wrong side of the issue. Laxist attitudes allowed terrorist to plan a multi-level attack on 9/11. You and your children can refrain from being searched and sue the planet if you like. I'll go threw the line with mine and smile and keep from clogging the pipeline.

Posted By tulipsonly on 28 Nov 2010 08:34 PM
Really, my dad and uncles used to tell stories about mothers and grandmothers handing their crying babies to soldiers in Vietnam with grenades in their diapers. I say check everybody. I'll just be happy to get my kids home for a visit in one piece.

You do realize there was no Al Qaida in Iraq until Saddam was gone, right?  My point is, in a sufficiently repressive state, we all can be considered "safe" from terrorists.  The problem with that is that, then the government itself becomes the enemy.  This has happened throughout history time & time again.  Trading away freedom for the sake of safety is purely an illusion; in the end you will have neither. 

Is your husband in the military?  Did he not pledge to uphold the Constitution?  This is what we're fighting for. We will never rid the world of terrorists, but we may succumb to a threat far worse which is the loss of our rights which countless Americans in generations past fought & died for to preserve.  And you would give it up just to feel "safe"?  People who so carelessly value our freedom scare me.

And. I am free to travel....... as long as it's without endangering the lives of others. And I'd like for everyone else on the plane to be held to the same terms. As far as dying..... I'd like it to not be on a plane.

I don't believe in my lifetime I can remember a single "freedom" that I've lost, only those gained. Yes, my husband is in the military, as was my father, and his father and all of my uncles and so on. It's called a difference of opinion. That is also a freedom I am afforded. I never said you shouldn't have your's or act on it. I was debating my side of the issue. And, I did that without questioning anyone's personally.

As far as dying..... I'd like it to not be on a plane.

What happened on 9/11 is going to stay with everyones minds for the rest of our lives. Everytime you board a plane, it triggers memories of the planes reaching the towers.. I would be the first to say, that if someone tried to do what they did before, and I was onboard, I would rather die fighting then to just sit in my chair patiently waiting for someone on the ground to resolve the issue politically. Its just not common sense. Terrorists do not take over or plot an attack onboard a plane for money. So you have to realize, if your in the situation, you better be prepared to defend yourself if you ever want to walk off that plane again. Now, if it was some explosive device, that you cant even defend against, that is definitely not the way I would like to go out..

Posted By tulipsonly on 28 Nov 2010 10:18 PM
lol. You show your "papers" every time your cross into another country and have for a very long time and so far I've never been strip searched. I think it's all a little alarmist on the wrong side of the issue. Laxist attitudes allowed terrorist to plan a multi-level attack on 9/11. You and your children can refrain from being searched and sue the planet if you like. I'll go threw the line with mine and smile and keep from clogging the pipeline.

I guess I need to slow down a little... I'm talking about domestic travel, which I thought was obvious.   Like what they required in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.  You do know, I presume, that Janet Napolitano is already talking about installing these strip search machines in train stations & bus terminals, football stadiums & other public venues?  And then of course, it's just a matter of time before someone inserts a bomb where the sun don't shine which the present generation of machines can't detect. Then people like you will cry "Keep us safe" and we all line up for the full cavity search.

Ridiculous, you say, they would never take it that far. Yet a year ago we never expected to be viewed naked as a condition of travel.  There is a line that they won't cross, and yet the line has already been crossed.  So what's next?

lol, as you so aptly say.

Oh Goodness. I say "aptly". I guess we could take so many hypotheticals to the next level couldn't we. No I wouldn't allow cavity searches. No I don't think their will ever be full body scans at train stations and bus stations all of the world or even the U.S. For one it's to expensive and the Government doesn't love us enough to save us at that cost. I was just discussing the pat down and the scan at the airport. I'm opting out this has gone to the dark side.

Ridiculous, you say, they would never take it that far. Yet a year ago we never expected to be viewed naked as a condition of travel. There is a line that they won't cross, and yet the line has already been crossed. So what's next?

I have no problem with these scanners... What would happen if they implemented this to enter into a Military Base? Would you still argue with it? You really couldnt, because its the bases policy, which is the same as TSA. They have a pretty tough job. They get blamed for anything and everything if something goes wrong anywhere. I just think they need to have some better tactics when they deal with special situations, like a handicap boy / girl..

Posted By Rashaka on 28 Nov 2010 08:52 PM
I believe Benjamin Franklin said it best, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

This has always been one of my favourite quotes. I believe in it fully. And the scanners are walking a very fine line, I am not sold on them.

The situation with the little boy is ridiculous. Just like the situation with that stripped-searched granny way back, etc. Things like this need to be fixed and resolved before I'll ever be for that scanner.

Posted By Adam Jones on 28 Nov 2010 10:30 PM

As far as dying..... I'd like it to not be on a plane.

Terrorists do not take over or plot an attack onboard a plane for money. So you have to realize, if your in the situation, you better be prepared to defend yourself if you ever want to walk off that plane again.

Adam, you forget that pre-9/11 was a different era. Before that, taking over airplanes for money was actually the most common motive. No one had ever before commandeered an airplane and intentionally crashed it. We had never before encountered such extremists.  In the 60's, it was "Take this plane to Cuba." (go figure)  In the 70's it was for money (google DB Cooper).  In the 90s, it was to free their comrades from prison.

So the modus operandi was, let the hijacker have his way, fly where he wanted to go, you would land and then negotiate to free the other passengers and/or storm the plane (google Operation Entebbe).

For this reason, box cutters were seen as no big deal in those days.  It all changed on 9/11.

That said, the first 3 planes crashed in NY and DC with nary a whimper.  By then, the passengers on the 4th plane figured out the rules had changed, they fought back and successfully defended the probable next target in Washington DC. This now is the mindset in aviation security; it's still relatively recent.

I'm totally with you on fighting back. If you look at post-9/11 bombing attempts, they all have been defeated by passengers on the plane (shoe bomber; underwear bomber). They still are not being intercepted by the intellectual giants of the TSA.

Posted By Elizabeth on 28 Nov 2010 10:50 PM

Posted By Rashaka on 28 Nov 2010 08:52 PM
I believe Benjamin Franklin said it best, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

This has always been one of my favourite quotes. I believe in it fully.

Like.

I have to agree with Tulips....I see no problem with properly administered pat downs of not only myself but of my children as well as full body scans. I'm sorry but it is not seeing you naked..the person monitoring the images cannot see my stretchmarks from my 4 pregnancies, my tattoos, or any other minor flaws that we have on our bodies. It is simply a very good outline and yes may be detailed as to your shape, but I do not think it is a violation of your rights. You are choosing to fly, so you must undergo all the screening necessary to do so, if you do not want to then don't fly...
Seriously I remember after 9/11 people didn't want to fly anywhere b/c of the risk of terrorist attacks. Now some 9 years later we all simply forget that feeling of worry and apprehension. I for one hope that everyone on my plane has been thoroughly searched/screened, and if that means I must stand in a full body scan or have a pat down to include around my private areas then so be it.....

Wow. I personally feel that people are to uptight about nudity. Sure take naked pictures whatever. I do have a problem with the pad downs. If you have seen the pictures they are not much to look at. A naked hairless body with random things floating around them. I say make the scanner manditory for everyone , no patdowns.

I like way it is when you fly domestically in Japan. They just wnt to see your ticket. No ID or anything.

Posted By missyrn on 29 Nov 2010 11:11 AM

Seriously I remember after 9/11 people didn't want to fly anywhere b/c of the risk of terrorist attacks. Now some 9 years later we all simply forget that feeling of worry and apprehension. I for one hope that everyone on my plane has been thoroughly searched/screened, and if that means I must stand in a full body scan or have a pat down to include around my private areas then so be it.....

I have forgotten nothing.  I simply choose not to cower & live in fear.  45 days after the 9/11 attacks, I flew to Paris from San Diego because fares were so low. Nobody much was traveling so I got a good deal. People asked "Aren't you afraid of flying?" My response was no, I simply choose not to live in fear. I'm going to go on with my life regardless.

Maybe it's just me.  If it is, then truly the terrorists have won and I'm not just rehashing a pat phrase. I truly mean it. The goal of extremists is to take away our freedom.  I can only say, terrorists took nothing from us but apparently too many Americans are willing to give up their rights voluntarily. I grieve for the American spirit which seems to have died in one short generation.

When you think of the hardships suffered by our founding fathers simply to write the words: "we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor" to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."  Blood was shed to write these words, and it's tragic to see it being given up so easily.

The Constitution is the greatest document ever conceived by the human mind; it should not be trampled on lightly.  Freedom given up cannot be regained.

But that's just me...

Posted By Ex-navy Dave on 29 Nov 2010 11:55 AM
Wow. I personally feel that people are to uptight about nudity. Sure take naked pictures whatever. I do have a problem with the pad downs. If you have seen the pictures they are not much to look at. A naked hairless body with random things floating around them. I say make the scanner manditory for everyone , no patdowns.

I like way it is when you fly domestically in Japan. They just wnt to see your ticket. No ID or anything.

Trust me, I'm no prude. Nudity doesn't phase me.  If an airline wants to see me naked to fly on their airplane, fine. I'll either do it, or choose another airline, or take a train. But when the federal government imposes this as a condition of travel, that's unreasonable search & seizure and we've gone too far. 

BTW, most of you probably haven't seen the actual scans generated by these machines. They are too explicit to show in mainstream press. There are two types of machines: Backscatter and millimeter wave.  What you see in the press are the backscatter images which are more fuzzy, and even those are often blurred in strategic spots to make them acceptable to news media. They are altered.  If you look at images of millimeter wave scanners, they are detailed nude photos.  They are displayed as a photo negative. If you reverse the coloration like in photoshop, you end up with a full-color, nude photo with recognizable face, etc. They are quite explicit and virtually never reported on in the press.

Again, my gripe is with the government mandating that we must go through this as a condition of travel. If a private company imposed this constraint, fine -- I would just avoid that company.  It's a bit harder to avoid the government.

Well said ThaiGuy!

All the TSA is doing is pushing the people around to see how much we're willing to tolerate. Didn't those same founing fathers say, many times, that the government should fear the people, and not the people fear the government?

And everyone needs to realize that if a terrorist is willing to give up their life to destroy something there is NOTHING that can be done to stop them? Stop being afraid and start living.

Excuse me, but you're sounding a little self righteous. Assuming that those of us who agree with stronger screening methods and comply are "afraid" and don't travel. I travel, lol, I'm living in Japan. My husband is at this very moment serving his country and protecting my rights and freedoms on the George Washington, and we all know where the GW is right now. I'm not living in a box sir. You have no idea of the sacrifices that some have made yet you make blanket statements with a broad sweep. That's interesting in that you yell "freedom" when you are actually arguing when the issue is a difference of opinion. Nobody is taking away your freedom to travel. Nor am I giving away any civil liberties by being diligently screened before I board a plane.

Yes, TSA's total purpose is to harass, embarrass and inconvenience the public. There's a lot of money in that. I'm sure it's in their mission statement.

Oh and by the way, flying isn't a God given freedom. It's a private club. You have to pay to get in and agree to play by club rules.

Thank you, Rashaka. I'm glad I'm not the only one who "gets it." Given a choice of living safely in a box, or living as a free man understanding it's a dangerous world, I will choose freedom each & every time. And for those who don't know, I'm USN (ret). I swore an oath to defend these beliefs.

People need to understand that giving up rights is a slippery slope. If you think TSA has run out of ideas on how to make us line up like sheep, they're not even close to being done. Let's see... right now, under the Safe Skies program, they need to be notified in advance that you are inbound flying to the US so they can check you out before you arrive. How would advance notice for domestic travel grab you? That way, they'd have time to run a quick check and make sure you're not on any list before going from LA to Albuquerque. That would certainly keep us safer. Trust me, they've got plenty more up their sleeve and apparently the public is just willing to go with it.

But that's just it... By allowing TSA to conduct the scan or the "pat down" you're allowing them to walk all over your 4th amemdment rights that prevent the government (TSA is part of the government) from unlawful search and seizure. For the government to search your person or effects there must be probable cause for the search. Would you agree to random searches of your vehicle while travelling? Random screening of your home by the authorities to look for drugs or weapons?

If I'm pulled over by the police and they want to "take a look around in my vehicle" I am well within my rights to say NO. Same thing applies if they knock on my door to ask questions. Unless there is a reaon for them to do the search they can't force me to go through with it. And if I say NO they MUST get a warrant stating what they're looking for.

Please don't pull the "My hubby is on the GW" card for this. It would be safe to say 95% of the people on this site have some affiliation with the military. Lots of husbands, wives, sons and daughters are out there on the GW, as well as the other ships from Yokosuka and other places as well. No need to bring them into this debate.

Is your husband in the military?  Did he not pledge to uphold the Constitution?  This is what we're fighting for. We will never rid the world of terrorists, but we may succumb to a threat far worse which is the loss of our rights which countless Americans in generations past fought & died for to preserve.  And you would give it up just to feel "safe"?  People who so carelessly value our freedom scare me.

My inclusion of my husband was a direct response to a question. Would you like to administrate the forum and dictate which comments I can respond to and which parts of topics I respond to and how I should format my replies..... hummmmm. Interesting.

Normally when someone replies in an online forum they put "@ Name - " to show the reply to a person. I'll apologize for my comment about inclusion of your hubby since I didn't realize it was an answer to someone's question.

The comparison isn't between private home/vehicle and public transportation. It is between private home, private vehicle and private person. All of those are protected the same under the 4th amendment.

If the airports were to do away with the TSA (which they were allowed to do after having them for 2 years) and contract private security I woud have no issue with the scans and pat-downs. If Bob owns the airport and hires Tammy for security Bob and Tammy can decide what measures to have in place. When Bob and Tammy decide then it IS a "private club" and I have to abide by their rules. But when the TSA decides on the rules without regard to the Constitution I have a serious problem with it.

We'll probably never agree on this issue, which I'm totally alright with, but I will try to debate my views to the best of my ability. :-)

When you keep your debating to the facts and issue(s) and refrain from personally attacking someone elses' views or their reference to their own experience or family members, the debate is much more effective. Especially when you reference your own. Example: your own security clearance. I appreciate insight from another debater and often say so. When its only factual it has the ability to enlighten another point of view. When you sweep judgement on another debaters point of view it creates a hostile environment and the issue is clouded. I appreciate your apology and I reserve the right to refer to my husband whenever I like. He is part of my personal experience.

Personally I don't live in fear, I'm not sitting on a plane biting my nails and sweating waiting for it to crash. However I see no harm in protecting not only the airline I'm on but whatever target a terrorist maybe trying to attack. Remember when people were appalled that they had to remove their shoes at the airport? Well, now it's routine and noone seems to mind, give it a little time and I'm sure all of you will be nicely standing in line for your pat down or body scan, and if your not then sorry you won't be on my flight.
I just want to say one last thing...
You are paying to fly, by doing so you make an agreement with the airlines to undergo whatever process there is in order to board the aircraft. Again if you don't like the rules....don't fly!

"Well, now it's routine and noone seems to mind, give it a little time and I'm sure all of you will be nicely standing in line for your pat down or body scan" (Just like the government wants, complacent and unquestioning...)

And that little bit of freedom we'll never get back. This is the problem (in my opinion) with the US today... Public outcry about something, then we just roll over and take it. And when these scans and frisks become "routine" and TSA implements a new policy that says you have to fly in TSA issued sweats (that would be safer, after all), then another that says no more carry-on items (less of a chance things could get into the aircraft that way), then they start with the cavity searches (because that's the only place left to hide anything). All of that will become "routine" as well.

I would love to not fly. But, unfortunately, I don't have that option. Travel with the military is like death and taxes, it will happen. I also have to travel for work. Because the government requires me to travel by plane (I seriously doubt they'll put me on a ship back to the US) I am forced to undergo this scan or frisk like I was a criminal?

I have nothing to hide, but on that note I also have given the government no reason to conduct a strip search (the scan) or a frisk. For the government to search me, my home, my car, or my effects there MUST be probable cause for the search. Then there must be notification made to me of what they are searching for. I can see no justification that wanting to board an airplane is probable cause for anything (except wanting to get somewhere quickly).

Again your choice...
I'd like to say you choose to live in the US, you choose Your job, You choose to fly, You choose to obey or not obey the rules of flying.....I will stand there quietly and obey b/c our country is not about getting what you want the way you want it, it's about being able to make your own decisions that are still within the rules of govenrnment. You elect the officials into office and if you think they should stand with you against these rules, then next time vote for someone different. I read somewhere recently that more people agree with the new rules than disagree, so hate to say it but you might just be in the minority, thus will not win this fight.
I do not see myself as a conforming sheep in society. I see myself as a productive citizen who doesn't start an uprise over something new every chance they get!

??? "Again your choice..."

If I have to fly back for work/military travel then I am subjected to the rules that I would otherwise gladly avoid. These rules were not in place when I chose to come to Japan, but now I have to deal with them when I go back to the US. Not a "choice" if you ask me...

I wonder where we would be if Jefferson, Adams, Franklin and Washington adopted your attitude and "stood there quietly obeying" the rules of their government (the English monarchy) instead of taking a stand against what they felt was an injustice.

The head of the TSA (like the Homeland Security Secretary) are NOT elected officials, they are put there by the officials that we elect. And I, for one, did not vote for this president; I DID vote for someone different... And if I'm in the minority, so be it. As a member of the minority my rights must be protected, anyone have the phone number for the ACLU? Just because people agree to it doesn't make it right or legal.

What happens when the "rules of government" directly contradict the Constitution? The Constitution is the law of the land, all other laws must not take away from the rights that it guarantees to the people. This new "enhanced screening" is in direct violation of the 4th amendment.

Im just wondering about the whole ruckus about the backscatter and millimeter scanners. Have anybody seen an official image that is produced by the said machines? All i see on the internet are fuzzy images and some will argue that they are the backscatter scans and that the other machine, the millimeter scanners produce negative images that can be inverted in photoshop to a full colored picture. but again, have anybody seen an image? All evidence so far are all hear-say. We may be all debating about something that is not even true. Just wondering..

. This new "enhanced screening" is in direct violation of the 4th amendment.

Really, you must not have ever lived "on base", or driven a car on a military instillation, or work on one where you stored your personal effects in a desk or locker.  I believe in the best interest of the majority "enhanced screening" policies are the norm.  

Posted By missyrn on 29 Nov 2010 03:44 PM

I will stand there quietly and obey 

You people have no idea how scary you sound.  Can you think of an historical precedent where the entire population just stood quietly and obeyed?  Can we learn nothing from the past?

To put it another way: "All that is needed for the forces of evil to triumph is for enough good men to do nothing."

You can't be seriously comparing access to a military facility to boarding an airplane?!

Wait, you are... Alright. When you approach a military base there are signs up that proclaim it is military (or federal, depending on where you are) property and that by coming on to the base you are agreeing to follow the rules of the military while you're there. These rules include random alcohol screening and random vehicle searches, sometimes with military working dogs. I get that, the military assets need to be protected. (Clinton, however, didn't get that and opened military bases to the public in the 90's... But that's a topic for a different day.)

So you're fine with allowing the TSA to violate everyone's 4th amendment rights as long as they don't profile? What if TSA received credible intel that a group of women with blonde hair and green eyes were going to try and take over a plane? Or if a group of heavily tattooed gang members were working on a terrorist plot? I would rather have the government do what MANY OTHER countries are doing and use some form of profiling when screening passengers. Israel, for instance, has had few incidents since using profiling to look for and "enhance" the screening of "likely terrorists".

But I'll go back to an earlier comment I made... If the airport security is provided by a private organization then whatever measures they want to use would be fine. My problem is the GOVERNMENT stepping in under the guise of "safety" to require either a "nude scan" or a frisk.

I have a voice and will use it. You all can "stand quietly and obey".

right. The U.S. Government has motive to see me naked. I'm flattered. lol

Posted By missyrn on 29 Nov 2010 03:44 PM

 you might just be in the minority, thus will not win this fight. 

I like that. We can just take care of those in the majority and damn the rest.  It makes life so much simpler.  I don't like the idea of mosques in our big cities; they make me nervous and they're an insult to those who died in 9/11.  So make them build mosques like in small towns or countryside, and the majority will certainly be a lot happier.

That sound you hear in the background is the shredding of our Constitution.  Glad to hear the old rules no longer apply.