Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:27 PM
 
146 posts, read 444,410 times
Reputation: 79

Advertisements

Anyone ever think of reading this "outdated" document???

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

"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."

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Now, I think it is reasonable to search baggage at airports, but really.....isn't it a little unreasonable to pat down every single person? I understand that the Constitution doesn't really apply here, since people can just aviode the pat down by not flying....but I dont think the founding fathers would allow this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:38 PM
 
Location: My little patch of Earth
6,193 posts, read 5,370,306 times
Reputation: 3059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretzelogik View Post
"What's the Constitution?" BHO
A Constitutional scholar once said:

"And to the extent as radical I think as people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted. The Warren Court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can't do to you. It says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."

Guess who?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,029 posts, read 14,213,258 times
Reputation: 16752
Americans have not had a "normal" constitutional government since 1933.
Why?
STATE OF EMERGENCY
http://www.city-data.com/forum/16580353-post3.html
For 40 years [the report spans 1933-1973], freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency.
Since 1933, Americans have lived under a continuous national emergency that empowers the "servant" to rob us blind, tie us up, and molest us - "for our own good!"

=================
Ever wonder why no candidate campaigns on the promise to END the state of emergency?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:46 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,060,237 times
Reputation: 15038
Your argument rests on a few fine points.

You are under no obligation to be searched. You are free to refuse being searched, and at anytime you can turn around and walk away. However, you would be hard pressed to demonstrate a Constitutional right to pass through to the boarding area as a result. So if you do wish to pass through to the boarding area, you are in fact consenting to the search.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:51 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,982,506 times
Reputation: 4555
I think this whole thing is funny. Americans are fine with signing off on erosions of their civil liberties as long as it's not them having to sacrifice. And right wingers just love to scare people about the "terrorist threat"....but the minute this stupidity effects wealthy business travelers you don't hear much about security anymore!....all the fake libertarians come out of the woodwork.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:53 PM
 
Location: Out in the Badlands
10,420 posts, read 10,832,599 times
Reputation: 7801
We are lobsters being brought to a slow boil. Adolf would be proud.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:54 PM
 
9,803 posts, read 16,196,736 times
Reputation: 8266
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
your argument rests on a few fine points.

You are under no obligation to be searched. You are free to refuse being searched, and at anytime you can turn around and walk away. However, you would be hard pressed to demonstrate a constitutional right to pass through to the boarding area as a result. So if you do wish to pass through to the boarding area, you are in fact consenting to the search.

bingo !
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:56 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,509,263 times
Reputation: 27720
Well the Fed Gov has deemed TSA groping "reasonable".

So..SHUT UP AND ASSUME THE POSITION !

Just figure once you enter the airport you give up your rights. Know that before you walk through those doors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2010, 03:57 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,509,263 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Your argument rests on a few fine points.

You are under no obligation to be searched. You are free to refuse being searched, and at anytime you can turn around and walk away. However, you would be hard pressed to demonstrate a Constitutional right to pass through to the boarding area as a result. So if you do wish to pass through to the boarding area, you are in fact consenting to the search.
No you can't. The TSA is suing the guy that did that.
That's the "Don't touch my junk" guy. He returned his ticket and left the airport..the TSA is still going to sue him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2010, 04:01 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,982,506 times
Reputation: 4555
What the government IS doing is using these Patriot Act type laws to unconstitutionally snoop on Americans when they transit airports. Unable to get a real search warrant, they wait until the traveler is at the airport then seize their papers and laptops. The law was designed to thwart terrorism but the Obama administration uses it to get around search warrrants.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/gl...ing/index.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top