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.
Here is something germane to our original discussion about 4th Amendment rights - it would appear that you can legally waive your rights under the 4th Amendment, and people submitting to these new scans are certainly consenting, so that should put the "my civil rights are being violated" argument to bed.
"Generally speaking, searches conducted without a warrant are unreasonable because they violate the Fourth Amendment. However, most searches occur without warrants because police take advantage of these legal exceptions to the Fourth Amendment:
[Consent Searches] If the police ask your permission to search your home, purse, briefcase or other property, and you freely consent, their warrantless search automatically becomes reasonable and therefore legal. Consequently, whatever an officer finds during a consent search can be used to convict the person."
Not so fast with the "bedtime story". There is one GLARING PROBLEM ... the TSA are not asking for your permission. They are requiring it, as a condition of allowing you passage through security. Furthermore, once in security, they claim to have the power to file suit against you for $10,000 if you do not allow them to complete this search AS THEY SEE FIT to conduct it. How anyone with a brain could mistake this as being a choice or asking permission is frankly rather amazing.
Now, comparing that to your police scenario, if a police officer doesn't ask you for permission, but just proceeded to search you without asking, or implied that you had no choice but to allow them to search you, they would be in violation of the 4th, and whatever they found would not be admissible evidence against you. They could also be prosecuted themselves for violating your constitutional rights. Furthermore, before a police officer can search your person legally, they must have probable cause, must place you under arrest, and then pat you down. And they may not conduct that pat down in the manner currently being done by the TSA, even with you being under arrest! They cannot stick their hands down inside your pants, or touch your genitals. Doing so outside the clothing is a misdemeanor, and inside the clothing touching skin is a felony-sexual battery. These rules apply to everyone ... regular citizens, police officers, Sheriffs, TSA ... no one is above the law.
SO ... the TSA requires you to do one of two things ... go through the naked body scanner (and as I have already shown, is basically a photonegative of your naked body, and could certainly qualify as an unreasonable violation of privacy) or, submit to the invasive pat down, which is also entails unreasonable contact. They aren't asking, they are requiring ... by requiring it, they are not giving you the option to decline ... in fact they threaten you with a $10K fine if you don't allow it. No such choice is available to the passenger to say no without penalty, therefore no such permission is being asked ... consequently no consent, and no waiving of 4th Amendment rights has taken place.
This really isn't at all complex. It's really straight forward. With the police, they must ask you "may I ...." and if you ask them "do I have a choice to say no" they MUST tell you "Yes ... you can say no". If they tell you you don't have a choice ... they are violating the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan
[/list]So, we can focus on whether these scans are acceptable on a personal level, or effective now. It certainly appears that they are legal. Unless it is illegal for the airline to require you to go through security as a pre-requisite to boarding the plane, that is.
What a ridiculous thing to say ... there has ALWAYS been security at airports. That isn't the issue at all. Metal detectors are non-invasive, and pose no recognized health hazards, and as far as I know, nobody has objected to this security measure. The objections relate to the "new security measures" ... not that there are security measures. And it's equally ridiculous to insinuate that if one security measure is legal, ALL possible security measures would automatically be legal by default. Who do you think is going to buy that load of crap?
Yes, there is proof out there that US Marshals in Olrando saved some footage. It's on Gizmodo, just do a search and you'll see it.
Yes, that proves the TSA lied about the inability to store images - that was the whole point of the article.
Lastly, I don't advocate these scans, I just don't believe they are a violation of your civil rights, since you don't HAVE to submit to them. You can always hop in your Chevy and drive.
Oh, and about those "documented facts" and "naked photos" you mention - it would appear I'm not the only one that, perhaps, didn't do his homework. There appears to be evidence to suggest that the photos posted on TheHumbleLibertarian site that you linked to and posted photos of may be <GASP!> fakes. Yep, could be. Have a look:
She says two female Charlotte T.S.A. agents took her to a private room and began what she calls an aggressive pat down. She says they stopped when they got around to feeling her right breast… the one where she'd had surgery.
"She put her full hand on my breast and said, 'What is this?'. And I said, 'It's my prosthesis because I've had breast cancer.' And she said, 'Well, you'll need to show me that'."
. If they tell you you don't have a choice ... they are violating the law.
Well if they WANT to make a law that says you have to get buck nekkid to fly they certainly can via The House/Congress and the Pres.
So the Feds run the TSA therefore they have determined that in order to BOARD an airplane while inside the USA, you must be subjected to a screening process. IF you do not agree with the process, you will have to find another mode of transportation. IF you do agree, you are free to fly about the country.
I am not saying it is right or wrong, but they can CREATE laws and if YOU violate those laws they can arrest and prosecute you.
Actually, yes. Even then. Cancers due to radiation exposure are, like almost all other environmental cancers, primarily diseases of old age.
I hope you have already noted that it's clear I think very little on this issue. It is asinine on its face and worthy only of mockery.
Historian Dude. You are sorely mistaken. The cause of Cancer has NOTHING to do with old age. The elderly may have more diagnosis simply because it often takes 20 years before western medical doctors will give you a diagnosis. In the early 1900's Cancer was EXTREMELY RARE. Today it is 1 in 3 for one gender and one in two for the other have or will get the disease. In the early 1900's so few people had cancer it was something like 600 people out of 1 million got it according to old Medical Journals from that time...which I'd be happy to provide if you don't believe me. In other words only 6 people out of every 10,000 got it.
Even back then they noticed cancer rates were rising and .linked it to the increasing use of chemicals/preservatives in our food. DUH! We have all been sold a bill of good over the years that our food is "safe" yet our food and are so called "health care" is the biggest killer in our country!
For one quick example, look at the warning labels all over your toothpaste that contains Flouride (which is rat poisoning by the way) and even added to some public water supplies. Secondly look at the deadly ingredients in vaccines that are listed on the World Association of Vaccine Education website novaccine.com.
That is why this whole airport security screening is so outrageous and humiliating and it is sad that we are so compliant and willing to let our government walk all over us. It is harassment of Americans pure and simple. The chances of anyone dying from a terrorist is slim to none -- especially now that pilots have a gun in the cockpit of the plane.
The way to stop it is to just STOP using commercial airliners until they get the message and take away the demeaning security measures.
No comment - Sheeple do not read, nor comprehend the USCON, nor read law.
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.
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.
