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)
View Poll Results: Are you willing to give up some constitutional rights to feel safe?
I would rather not have any security checks at airports and take my chances on the flight. 64 68.09%
I would be willing to submit to a search without probable cause so that my fight will be safer. 30 31.91%
Voters: 94. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-22-2017, 04:07 PM
 
62,945 posts, read 29,141,740 times
Reputation: 18578

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
I have seen a number of posts lately stating that we are too willing to give up our freedom for safety. Many of these posts quote;

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin


Are you willing to give up security checks at the airport as this infringes on our the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution to feel safe in airplanes?



Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution:

If you're not safe you are not free, period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-22-2017, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Pacific NW
9,437 posts, read 7,369,351 times
Reputation: 7979
Why the hell would you sacrifice anything for false security? The TSA is totally incompetent and not making ANYONE safer.

TSA Fails 95 Percent Of Airport Security Tests Conducted By Homeland Security
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2017, 06:45 PM
 
18,323 posts, read 10,661,093 times
Reputation: 8602
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
I have seen a number of posts lately stating that we are too willing to give up our freedom for safety. Many of these posts quote;

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin


Are you willing to give up security checks at the airport as this infringes on our the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution to feel safe in airplanes?



Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution:
Show me that Ben Franklin knew anything about airplanes or was ever on one and I will listen to him ,till then BS,we must do what will keep America safe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-22-2017, 08:23 PM
 
Location: PSL
8,224 posts, read 3,496,850 times
Reputation: 2963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
I'd rather be a living nancy boy then a dead real man. That's just me.
So you'd buy 5 minutes of life to comply, than to risk a 50/50 chance at living much longer?

Interesting.

Handful of Armed scumbags and we're going to die regardless. I'll take my chances and go out swinging. Who knows maybe inspire others to help. Increase the odds. If there's 50+ aboard an airplane vs a handful of Armed scumbags... I like those odds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2017, 04:47 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,305,403 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY_refugee87 View Post
So you'd buy 5 minutes of life to comply, than to risk a 50/50 chance at living much longer?

Interesting.

Handful of Armed scumbags and we're going to die regardless. I'll take my chances and go out swinging. Who knows maybe inspire others to help. Increase the odds. If there's 50+ aboard an airplane vs a handful of Armed scumbags... I like those odds.
I don't agree with your perspective on the situation nor the results you think would occur so I'm unable to answer your opening question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2017, 05:20 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,629,107 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
I have seen a number of posts lately stating that we are too willing to give up our freedom for safety. Many of these posts quote;

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin


Are you willing to give up security checks at the airport as this infringes on our the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution to feel safe in airplanes?



Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution:
It does not infringe since the search is reasonable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2017, 05:26 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,629,107 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Not enough choices.

Why should the American people be required to give up freedoms because the immigration policies are so very lax that these Islamic terrorists are being brought into this country and even given refugee welfare handouts?
It is not an immigration issue. None of the 9/11 attackers were immigrants. They were tourists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2017, 09:02 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,878,374 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by irspow View Post
If you disobey an immoral "law", such as resist arrest and punishment for a non crime such as prostitution, government goons will murder you if you resist enough. "Law" should specify only retaliatory force against aggressors. Most "law" is an act of aggression by government upon the individual. Such as forcing you to purchase goods and services for others against your will and against your interests.

If "law" was not a force, it would have absolutely zero effect upon free people acting freely in any way. If you assert "law" is not a force, what is the point of having them at all? No person would ever obey any law which went against their own interests if "law" did not use coercion and aggression upon the individual.

I do not have to "assert" that law is force, that it is force is obvious.
Civil disobedience has a long and respected history in the United States. If you disobey an immoral law, then you do so understanding what the penalty is, and wanting the penalty imposed to make your point about the law. Resist arrest, and you are not engaging in civil disobedience, you are engaged in civil unrest.

Law is not force. Law is simply laying boundaries. Because we elect our legislators in this country, the laws they pass are generally agreed upon by the people. When they are not, we have multiple ways to address the perceived injustice. And given the caseloads in our courts system, Americans are not shy about challenging laws they perceive to be unjust.

Nonetheless, despite all your drama (government goons, murder, law is force), a society without law is a society ruled by force. The bullies take over, and chaos ensues. All you have to do is observe some third world countries where the government is unable to uphold the laws, and the violence and lawlessness that is the result.

Law is not an act of aggression by government upon the individual when the individual consents to live by the laws enacted by that government, understanding that the laws are enacted to further the best interests of the people, and that laws that do not further the best interests of the people can be challenged and overturned. That is the case in the United States.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2017, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Honolulu/DMV Area/NYC
30,636 posts, read 18,222,068 times
Reputation: 34509
The security checks at airports are not unreasonable. And, note, they already constitute searches without probable cause, which is explicitly allowed under the 4th amendment, so long as they are reasonable. Thus, I answered yes as it's merely keeping the status quo. But the question is misleading for the above reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2017, 10:00 AM
 
Location: The ends DO NOT justify the means!!!
4,783 posts, read 3,742,256 times
Reputation: 1336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
It does not infringe since the search is reasonable.
Presumption of guilt is "reasonable"? However, there is no infringement of natural rights IF it was implemented by private business. They own the planes, it is their business, and they can set their own rules for those who want to be customers. It IS an infringement as it is now because it is imposed by the State.

Let the free market decide. Some airlines will keep looking for shoe bombs. Other airlines will attract other people who wish not to waste their time being treated like criminals without any reason for the airline to assume so.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:30 AM.

© 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