Status of Anti-gropiing (TSA Security Patdowns) bill in Texas.... (merged threads) (Earth: crimes, high school)

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by RedJacket

An astounding Department of Justice threat to cancel airline flights to and from Texas, in addition to underhanded lobbying by TSA representatives, has killed efforts in the state to pass HB 1937, a bill that would have made invasive pat downs by TSA agents a felony.

» Financial Terrorism: TSA Holds Texas Flights Hostage Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Where's my Nazi party armband?

I'd like to know more details and all -- sort the concrete facts from the opinions -- before taking this link as completely valid in all its particulars. But thanks for providing it.

This is truly scary if all true...and even more foreboding if we don't take up the gaunlet and fling it contemptuously right back in their arrogant fed faces. In some ways, this might be one of the proverbial "hill(s) to die on" in a sense of a time to stand up and challenge this type thing.

For one thing, if the "supremacy clause" is to be interpreted as was the case by the DOJ spokeman? If that is the future of the constitution? The turn out the lights...it's all over as concerns classic federalism and freedom as we know it (or, knew it, even).

[getmeoutofhere]

The DOJ spokesman is correct (of a sort) about the Supremacy Clause. If there is valid federal law, then it supersedes state laws.

I don't know if the government has statutory requirements for pat-downs, but if they do, Texas cannot override them.

[RedJacket]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

I'd like to know more details and all -- sort the concrete facts from the opinions -- before taking this link as completely valid in all its particulars. But thanks for providing it.

A boisterous group of protesters angry over the Texas Senate’s failure to vote on the airport groping bill tried to enter the public gallery this afternoon and were blocked by state troopers.
Shouting “treason” and “cowards” and carrying signs and placards, and led by radio talk show host Alex Jones, the group of perhaps as many as 100 people entered the State Capitol shortly after 3 p.m. and first went to the House chamber.
There, House members quickly informed the shouting group that it was the Senate that had failed to take action late Tuesday on House Bill 1937, which would have made it a crime for security checkpoint screeners to handle the private parts of anyone they screened.

Austin news, sports, weather, Longhorns, business | Statesman.com

TX caved. TX blinked. What's wrong with Texas?

[Bo]

Originally Posted by RedJacket

TX caved. TX blinked. What's wrong with Texas?

The Texas Tribune says it was Lieutenant Gov. Dewhurst that blinked.

“Although he’ll deny it today, he’s simply not being candid, because I know, and other members know, that he was [working to persuade members not to support the bill]," Patrick said today of Dewhurst. “I was absolutely sideswiped by the lieutenant governor on this."

Texplainer: Is TSA "Groping" Bill Junk Legislation? — Texplainer | The Texas Tribune

[RedJacket]

Originally Posted by Bo

The Texas Tribune says it was Lieutenant Gov. Dewhurst that blinked.



Texplainer: Is TSA "Groping" Bill Junk Legislation? — Texplainer | The Texas Tribune

I beginning to wonder just what it'll take for the people of this country to stand up and say:

Enough is enough.

[doctorjef]

Texas is once again a laughingstock. All storm and fury, signifying -- nothing.

[verybadgnome]

Even besides the supremacy clause the interstate commerce clause would apply. And no I don't think have separate inspection stations for in-state and out-of-state flights would be the right answer. This is just another example of Texas hubris, without much forethought.

[Willsson]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

Texas is once again a laughingstock. All storm and fury, signifying -- nothing.

So now we know who are those that are easily entertained.

[doctorjef]

Yes, I am always entertained by the antics of vainglorious demagogues, but apparently not in quite the same way as the resident sheeple in Texas are.

It's not that I'm keen on pat-downs, but the individual states don't have jurisdiction on this matter. If you want to do something, then try to get congressional hearings convened on TSA procedure or pass some applicable legislation in the US Congress. Otherwise, quit your impotent, pathetic whinging.

[TexasReb]

You know I am going to challenge you on this one, my friend! I have only limited time over the next two days (last day or work today, then in-service tomorow), but I want to make a few preliminary rejoiners here...

Originally Posted by doctorjef

Yes, I am always entertained by the antics of vainglorious demagogues, but apparently not in quite the same way as the resident sheeple in Texas are.

This is not a demagouge issue. People all over the country are -- and have been for some time -- upset/disgusted/outraged on the heavy-handed tactics of many airport security personnel taking advantage of their petty bureaucratic power to physically sexual harrass and assault people....especially women. Further, because of political correctness, do it to those who in no way fit the profile of a terrorist.

The only "sheeple" are those who meekly accept being ever-more treated as subjects by their own government. On a related tangent, I believe it was DeToqueville who -- prophetically, in Democracy in America -- used the term "sheep" to describe those who, in the predicted waning days of freedom in the United States, would allow government to become their sole shepherd. Thus, later, the application was derived.

What is going on now is far, far, from accurate as to who takes what stance.

It's not that I'm keen on pat-downs, but the individual states don't have jurisdiction on this matter. If you want to do something, then try to get congressional hearings convened on TSA procedure or pass some applicable legislation in the US Congress. Otherwise, quit your impotent, pathetic whinging.

Sexual assault is always a state matter, and I know of no federal law which permits it. Keep in mind too, that the law would not apply to cases where there is a clear and reaonable belief that the person being handled is, in fact, a danger. Which is at least one reason why the supremacy clause may not apply (and if it does, God help us). Nothing prevents congressional hearings on the matter as well, so that seems to have the scent of a red-herring.

So far as the impotent, whining remark? C'mon DocJ, that falls far beneath your usual standard of general objectivity...even when you disagree with a particular issue. What would be impotent, pathetic whining is to object to this abusive power and tactic and do nothing about it...and/or slam those who do.

Texas is once again a laughingstock. All storm and fury, signifying -- nothing.

A laughing stock amongst whom? As mentioned earlier, this seething fury about treatment at airports is nationwide. And yes, it signifys plenty. It means some are ready to stand up to the feds. I am proud Texas is the first to do so. If Texas will stick to her guns (no pun intended), then it would not be in the least surprising to see other states join in.