Paul’s Privilege Against Detention
Politico is reporting that Sen. Rand Paul was detained today by the TSA at the airport in Nashville, Tennessee, after refusing a full body pat-down. He missed his flight and then was rebooked on another flight according to TSA officials. They denied that Paul had been detained but said he had not been given access to a secure area because he would not comply with their security protocols.
If Paul was actually detained, some might argue that officials at TSA were violating the Constitution since Article I, Section 6 specifically states that members of Congress “shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”
Would Paul’s travel fall within the protections of Section 6? Would interference with his ability to travel or even “detention” amount to an “arrest” that falls within the intent of this provision to prevent government authorities interfering with members of Congress when they are in session?
Those are unanswered questions. But this is certainly another example of just how stupid so many of the TSA’s security rules are. Does anyone really think a United States Senator is a security danger to a flight headed to Washington? DHS and TSA are so paranoid about being accused of “profiling” if they actually target suspicious individuals who meet terrorist profiles, that they waste enormous amounts of time and resources applying their absurd security rules to absolutely everyone, including “dangerous” members of Congress, ten-year olds, and grandmothers in wheelchairs.
Refusing to let him board the plane must count as a violation, or someday, in the days leading up to an important vote, we’re going to find a whole heck of a lot of Congress-critters being refused boarding. The whole point of that clause is to prevent the executive branch and the various states from blocking Congress by detaining the peoples’ representatives; leaving a loophole that’s so trivial to apply would leave us open to just that occurrence.
I agree.
Not allowing him to proceed to the gate, to board the airplane, seems to be a clear violation IF he was heading somewhere on Senate business at that time.
My first thought, too, Rob. Could be a very dangerous precedent.
Our current President, constitutional scholar he claims to be, would never detain a Senator or Representative unless, of course, in his opinion, he deemed that such legislator was not actually on his way to conduct legislative business.
Never!….Well, maybe if the vote was a close one…..
HYC, being a good person who believes in the Constitution, you do not understand Obama’s mala fides with regard to being a Constitutional lecturer: He studied the Constitution not to learn about it to uphold it, but to learn how to dismantle it and run-around it. That’s part of the “fundamental transformation” he was talking about.
My post apparently failed to convey my mocking disdain for our President. I consider him a tyrant and I fear for the safety of our Republic and for the loss of our individual liberties.
as a lawyer versed in the issue of ‘what is an arrest’, this was 100%, beyond quibble, an arrest.
simply, the senator was not free to withdraw or continue because of identified peace officers. his freedom of movement had been [temporarily] suspended.
“But this is certainly another example of just how stupid so many of the TSA’s security rules are. Does anyone really think a United States Senator is a security danger to a flight headed to Washington?”
My dad used to tell me that if I go with him I go with his rules or I go alone.
While I may not agree with the TSA they were correct to hold him back. None should be exempt from the rules.
He refused to submit to the rules as they stand today. What did he expect them to do? Certainly not their jobs.
@Carn
“My dad used to tell me that if I go with him I go with his rules or I go alone.”
Did your Dad provide the mode of transportation? If the answer is yes, then this is a totally different situation. The TSA is not a private airline that could legitimately refuse to seat any passenger. They are a federal bureacracy (under the executive branch, therefore the President) that has no business behaving this way.
Rules are rules. Rand Paul new the second he refused what the result would be. He did it anyway. The choices and results are on his head.
Toqueville had it right: Americans would rather be equal in jail than unequal in palaces. Sorry, you and I are not the same as a sitting US Senator enroute to the Capital city. A member of Congress has a specific and explicit privilege, we don’t, and I don’t have a problem with it. No state nor the federal executive should be able to detain, which is the same as arrest, a Member enroute to DC or on Congressional business.
Carn you dufus, the supreme “rules” are in the Constitution. Whatever “laws” Congress passed creating the TSA and giving them authority, and whatever “rules” TSA enacted thereafter, cannot trump the Constitution.
@Benjamin
And YET those rules still exist. So way I see it you either attempt to change them whilst following them or you disobey and face the consequences.
Really is this a new thing? Doing something with predictable results and complaining when the predictable result predictably happens?
I disagree. As soon as they saw his ID and if he stated he was on official business, they should’ve waved him through. The detained him, causing him to miss his flight.. and the TSA were in total and complete violation in this incident. Something had better be done about it or its only going to get worse. When it comes to the government and entities such as the TSA as well as, all the other bureaucracies.. to ignore is to condone. Just like dealing with small children.
“While I may not agree with the TSA they were correct to hold him back. None should be exempt from the rules.”
Except that the Constitution exempted him from them 200+ years before the TSA was created.
Sorry but the Constitution Trumps all laws. As for being detained it is the same as being under arrest. You think not, do something foolish while a cop is around,I don’t mean breaking the law, but bending it. When an officer comes over to you and you ask if you are under arrest and he says no. Then you ask well am I free to go, his answer will be no. You are being detained while we check you out.
No law broken, except article 1 section 6. The TSA has no juristition over our elected reps and senators.
America is turning into Nazi Germany, just look at the things Hitler did and what Obamanation is doing.
What part of this story eludes you Carn? The TSA has NO AUTHORITY to detain a member of congress on his way to Washington. You seem like a complete sheep to me – obey whatever rules, no matter how idiotic, because “you know what will happen” if you disobey…
Actually, per the 4th, they have no authority to do the majority of the things they are doing to all of us, senators aside.
Oh, and Carn, run along now. This is a place for thoughtful adults to hash out issues, not for the bleating of sheep.
Carn & Other Ill Informed Commenters:
Article 1, Section 6 says you are WRONG. No ifs, ands, or buts. When you fail to comprehend the law of the land you are aiding and abetting lawlessness.
The rules as they stand today are unconstitutional. We have a duty to refuse all laws that don’t comply with the U.S. Constitution, regardless of whether there is a fascist in the White House or not.
Are you so stuck in a kindergardener’s sense of fairness that you can’t understand that the very application of those rules to a US Senator or Representative is actually illegal under the US Constitution?
Carn, you’re wrong on three levels:
First, I’ve read some more in depth details, from Paul himself, on how things came down. The first trip through the scanner showed “an anomaly near the knee”. When they began demanding the full body physical searsh, he raised his pant leg and showed.. nothing but bare skin anywhere near the knee. He then offered to go through the scanner again. That’s when the TSA goons dug in… pat down or no go. SO– he fully compied with their request to look further after the scanner showed an “anomaly”. TSA stood by their paper tiger.
Second, TSA as an organisation is not lawfully constituted, it was formed by executive order, operates under an assumed authority that has NO BASIS whatever in the Constitution, therefore is not lawfully functioning. Sorry, the COnstitution absolutely TRUMPS and sets aside ANY and ALL rules, policies, orders, etc, that are not compatible with the COnstitution. YOu rant about laws bing laws, and if we don’t like them, get them changed. It is YOU who need to find a way to change the Constitution to render TSA a lawfully based entity, not WE THE PEOPLE who need to change TSA’s illegal and unconstitutional rules and policies.
Third, as pointed out a bit further below your original comment, that specific shelter against detainment for sitting legislators was written two centuries before TSA were formed. Again, the Constitution stands higher than TSA’s rules. It is TSA must bow to the supreme law of the land, which clearly makes their conduct illegal.
I hope Senator Paul makes a HUGE fuss about this, not because of his personal discomfiture, but because this sets a seriously dangerous precedent, that TSA are able to trump the Constitution and detail sitting legislators on their way to conduct official business. It is not too difficult to imagine mass boarding denials as legislators from across the land travel to DC for an important vote, nor difficult to extend the denials to SELECTIVE denials, this skewing a vote, or even preventing it altogether simply by denying a sufficient number of legislators so to fall short of a quorum. Remember Wisconsin’s sleazy Democrat lawmakers who left the state to prevent seating a quorum, thus preventing a vote wher ethey knew they’d lose. Their corruption was thwarted anyway. ALL who left should have been impeached for malfeasance.
TSA must be brought to heel… and I hope this incident motivates Paul to begin a campaign to do precisely that. He’d be just the guy to do it. Harry Reid wouldn’t. Of course, HE”S probably flying private aircraft, at taxpayer’s expense.
“Does anyone really think a United States Senator is a security danger to a flight headed to Washington?”
Yes!!!
Well, anyway, anytime the US Senate is in session it is a threat to our security! Lately there’s no telling what those congress critters will get up to.
Supreme Court limits police use of GPS to track suspects Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:22am EST
http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE80M1E120120123
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.
Re: “waste enormous amounts of time and resources applying their absurd security rules to absolutely everyone, including … ten-year olds, and grandmothers in wheelchairs”
If you have not observed that our enemies have been willing to use children and the elderly to defeat security measures, then you have not been paying attention. It would be quite easy to rig a suicide belt for a child or to hide explosives in a wheelchair.
Right.
That wasn’t really Senator Rand Paul, the Islamists used Mission: Impossible level plastic surgery to create a perfect double of Senator Rand Paul, right down to his fingerprints and his voice!
WayneM, if YOU have not observed that every airline hijacker since D. B. Cooper can be described with exactly four words — young adult male Arab — then YOU aren’t exactly paying attention. The TSA, like every progressive administrative organ, is willing to trade actual results for political correctness. If ever there was a situation where profiling — which, incidentally, is NOT illegal — was warranted, this is it, and of course, for that reason alone, no government entity will remove its cranium from its rectum long enough to see that fact.
How right you are. Back in the 70′s I worked for a major airline that had many flight to Miami being hijacked to Cuba.
We stopped that by profiling those who would likely be hijackers….young Latino males.
We cured the problem rather quickly.
While agree profiling is an idea that should be used the growing problem is that radical Islam is taking hold in many places around the US and is occurring among no Arab groups making it harder to use certain features to identify the suspects.
Why talk, when you are 100% wrong and have nothing to back it up?
Hijackings by grandmothers in wheelchairs: 0
Hijackings by 10 year old kids: 0
Hijackings by US congressmen: 0
Terror attacks by grandmothers in wheelchairs: 0
Terror attacksby 10 year old kids: 0
Terror attacks by US congressmen: 0
I didn’t realize that terrorist had been successful in brainwashing a US Senator into becoming a terrorist.
So it seems most people here think Paul had an absolute right to board the plane–and to blow off any or all security measures that stirred his pique at any given time? Mmm, gonna grant that same right to wack-job Congressfolks like Cynthia McKinney and a few other far-lefties? Thought not.
Paul reminds me of nothing so much as a spoiled Hollywood celeb who tell the cops, the TSA, the flight crew et al: “But don’t you know who I AM??”
Let him get to his session of Congress by taking the train.
Miguel, actually, yeah I think McKinney is covered by Article 1 as well.
Not saying Paul behaved as badly as McKinney did. He’s not a security risk, I am sure. But I kinda wonder about McKinney.
My question remains: do we really want to set a precedent that all Congresspeople, even the extremist nutcases (and there are a few), get to bypass any and all security, according to how it suits their whim that day?
“My question remains: do we really want to set a precedent that all Congresspeople, even the extremist nutcases (and there are a few), get to bypass any and all security, according to how it suits their whim that day?”
Are they on their way to session of Congress? Are they on their way home from a session of Congress?
If so, then the Constitution say, yes.
Are they on their way to a vacation in the Bahamas?
Then, no.
Don’t like it? Suggest an amendment to your representative and senator.
So Cynthia McKinney, crazy as a loon, gets to carry whatever she wants on board the plane with no security check at all, having just come from a laudatory visit to Hugo Chavez, but on her way to a session of Congress? Just wanna be sure…
(remember, the Consitution did not envision air travel; I take your point, but you’d have to extrapolate pretty heavily to arrive there. Probably one for the Supreme Court, if any Congressperson is ever goofy enough–and self-aggrandizing enough–to press the issue.)
“So it seems most people here think Paul had an absolute right to board the plane–and to blow off any or all security measures that stirred his pique at any given time? Mmm, gonna grant that same right to wack-job Congressfolks like Cynthia McKinney and a few other far-lefties? Thought not.”
As near I can tell, unlike Cynthia McKinney, Rand Paul did not breach the peace with his behavior or expect to be instantly recognized with no ID after getting a substantial(long to short) hair cut. Also, this right only applies to “Congressfolks”, no one else.
“Paul reminds me of nothing so much as a spoiled Hollywood celeb who tell the cops, the TSA, the flight crew et al: “But don’t you know who I AM??””
And what’s wrong with that? It saves on security when they can say “Hey your Bruce Willis, your probably not going to try to take over a plane.” Or better yet “Your neither muslim nor arab, the time for prayer was ten minutes ago and you haven’t moved. Your free to go” Also, “There isn’t a fuse sticking out of your shoes maybe they aren’t bombs.” Commen sense is severely lacking in just about any Government position, ergo lets go privatize airport security.
Unfortunately one of the reasons TSA is a gummint entity is because the airlines wished to lose the expense of providing the security checkpoints as well as eluding liability for security failures. Looks like it was a winwin for the airlines at our expense. Might have something to do with why I’ve flown a grand total of 4 times in the last 10 years out of a total possible number of trips in excess of 20.
Which means that the airlines really didn’t win, they just think they did. There’s no telling how many people simply choose not to fly to vacation because it’s too much hassle, and take car trips or whatever.
LOL….you got that right. I’m an ATP pilot…just retired after many years of flying…and I will not fly commercial any longer.
I’ll drive. The airlines have ruined flying as a pleasant experience and a means of transportation in my view.
You’ve got that right. I’m an ATP pilot…just retired after many years of flying…and I will not fly commercial any longer.
I’ll drive. The airlines have ruined flying as a pleasant experience and a means of transportation in my view.
I’m one of those. Wife and I just bought a small motor home because flying is just too much hassle, between the tsa attitudes, the restrictive rules of what we can and cannot carry, the cost of flights, add in rent a car and hotels…..
We did the math, cheaper to comfortably and PRIVATELY drive where we wanna go.
Of course, if he flew on a private jet he likely would avoid the clutches of TSA. Wonder how that would look to the good citizens of Kentucky? Huummmmm…..
This is just another Paulian stunt. So what. At least he is in congress and has the power to change the law. The rest of us regular shmucks go through this all of the time and can’t do anything about it. I just laugh about it now and don’t worry. Last time I joked with the TSA guy that I had to pay $60 back at the hotel for this kind of rubdown.
The airport is not the place to try and change the rules. He just comes off as one of those “do you know who I am?” arrogant types here.
No, he doesn’t come off that way. At least, not if you have the faintest clue what’s written in the Constitution.
“No, he doesn’t come off that way.”
Yes he does come off that way, and frankly the whole thing smells of a R.P. stunt. Right here at election time.
Rob is right – he does not come off that way at all. He comes off as a LIBERTARIAN who is PROTESTING and EXPOSING the incompetent authoritarian morons who run tsa and work for tsa. It is just a side bit that he also managed to expose the brain-dead sheep such as yourself who will spend 4 hours sitting at a broken red light at 3am so that you won’t break any rules from your master.
While it is a violation of the constitution, I think that is one part of the constitution which should be amended. A US senator would probably not blow up the plane but neither would most of us. Why should that segment of society be exempt….just as why should parking places right outside a terminal be limited to members of congress. Over the years members of congress have gained many privileges and are given many ‘GET OUT OF JAIL’ cards. One of the recent and most egregious examples is their use of insider trading to benefit themselves. Many get to congress having average salaries and savings but leave very well off.
The original reason for this had nothing to do with privilege. It was to prevent the President from detaining congressmen in order to affect an outcome in congress. It’s a separation of powers issue.
I see no reason why this isn’t just as valid a concern now than it was when the Constitution was framed. Would Obama do this if he could? Is water wet?
Exactly. They put that rule in, because that is exactly what used to be done to prevent certain opposition from being able to cast their votes. They used to use all kinds of such chicanery. We just haven’t had to experience it ourselves, because of this part of the Constitution. Our Founders really knew what they were doing.
If there were some real suspicion that a Congressman was involved in some plot (treason), then he could be detained, but there damned well better be a good case for it.
I agree with your basic thrust Donna, but wonder if you have missed the main point – by what right does TSA do the increasingly idiotic nonsense that they do? It is not about security, because news media and police agencies have demonstrated over and over and over that TSA is utterly incompetent and allows actual weapons and explosives thru while they search women with breasts or force 90yo women to remove their diapers. Furthermore, they do not search airline employees nor airport workers, nor do they ensure that airport doors are locked. The entire TSA exercise is futile and ridiculous – so it not that congress-creatures should submit like we do – it is that we should not submit to these asswipes either.
I’m amazed at the number of people who think the Constitution means nothing and it can be overriden by some flunky with a badge.
And I’m amazed at the quickness in which the Constitution – and more specifically the Bill of Rights – are being chipped away. And our freedoms are being eliminated with each new Congress. The Patriot Act was a lousy idea when it was introduced. Obama among others thought was a bad idea. Now? Well he signed an extension to it recently. I suppose it depends on whom you think will be carrying out such laws whether you think they are good or bad. The law letting him detain US citizens indefinitely without a hearing passed as a rider in the recently passed defense authorization. Of course a compliant Congress had to go along with it. Is it Constitutionally legal – hell no and we know it. Did it stop them from passing it? Hell no. Did anyone complain – very few.
TSA brings nothing to the table but a government sponsered jobs program that the taxpayer must pay for.
TSA also provides the opportunity for a corrupt government to harass the people of their choosing.
It’s way past time to turn off the machines and disband this huge monster that amounts an Islamic tax on the American people.
It’s pretty reasonable to ask for a repeat scan rather than a full body pat-down. The TSA would be doing itself a favor by giving its people some discretion.
I work at an airport and interact with TSA people daily and I know with the airport that I am at they do give people some discretion and multiple chances if they set off the metal detector but at larger busier airports that isn’t always an option because of the time constraints and the high passenger counts. Some TSA checkpoints do more than a 1000 people an hour in the big airports and are trying their best to make sure people make their flights while also working hard to make sure nothing gets on a plane that’s why they say to get there 2 hours before your flight.
I travel constantly all over the world, including to Israel. Nowhere on earth is the security system simultaneously so onerous and invasive yet totally incompetent and futile. And while it is likely that many TSA employees are great folks just working hard to provide safety and security, it is also a fact that many are goons who arrest people for using cellphones or simply asking them why they do what they do (not to mention how many steal valuables from passengers).
OT1H – the Constitutional protections for members of Congress are pretty explicit.
OTOH – There have been at least two members of Congress who committed homicide while in office (Rep. Philemon Herbert, D-CA, 1855-1857; Rep. Dan Sickles, D-NY, 1857-1861, 1893-1895). Sen. David Atchison (D-MO, 1843-1855) led armed Border Ruffians into Kansas.
More recently, Rep. Marion Zioncheck (D-WA, 1933-1936) went more or less insane in office (he eventually jumped out a fifth-floor window). And the bizarre rhetoric of Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA, 1933-2007) does not argue for her trustworthiness.
You of course raise good points that members of congress can behave in a manner that is criminal however making rules based on the exception rather than the rule could arguably be the main problem with our regulatory state. Additionally, the referenced section of the Constitution has worked perfectly well historically. A separation of powers issue. Could this not possibly be a trial balloon to see if anyone was paying attention. “Rules are rules” is a defense for incompetence/ apathy as well as representing the ‘law of rules’ rather than ‘rule of law’
Regards
All democrats?? Not one R or even a whig? Amazing!
This is another one of my examples of how silly airport security has gotten, and how far they’ve gotten from actually keeping people from doing nefarious things on airplanes. My rule applies here:
“The purpose of airline security isn’t to catch terrorists or other criminals boarding airplanes. It’s to spread the inconvenience of searches and security measures as evenly among the public as is possible.”
If a celebrity, for instance, is getting on a plane flying commercial (a lot of them don’t any more) and their passport matches their face, how hard can this be? Does anyone really think George Clooney or Rand Paul are terrorists? Remember, we’re not talking about searching their luggage or whatever, we’re talking about what they carry on the plane specifically. The idea that we should have these people searched anyway, in the issue of fairness, is incredibly stupid. I haven’t been on a plane since this started, but I’m told that the wait is increased and the inconvenience is greatly increased, and all for what? More work for the TSA agents who search people? No terrorists have been caught, no plots foiled.
Oh, and #14 Rich Rostrum: I don’t know about the others, but the clause of the Constitution cited above specifically lists “Felony” as an exception to the rule that members of Congress can’t be arrested. Sickles was arrested for the murder of Philip Barton Key (his wife’s lover), tried and acquitted in court and went on to live happily ever after. However, since the clause of the Constitution specifically allows Congressmen to be arrested for felonies, and he was, it’s not really relevant to this discussion.
As much as I hate the TSA, and cheer Mr. Paul for sticking their face in it, we have to condemn all these silly rules themselves in their entirety, and not pick out supposed “obvious” exceptions we should make to them to them, to wit:
“If a celebrity…is getting on a plane…and their passport matches their face, how hard can this be? Does anyone really think George Clooney or Rand Paul are terrorists?”
And from the author:
“Does anyone really think a United States Senator is a security danger to a flight headed to Washington?”
Why would we expect anyone recognise them at all? I wouldnt recognise either of them from Adam in person.. White guys, average looking, suit…big whoop, wait your turn like everyone else….
Oh I’m sorry, youre FAMOUS, you say?
OTHER people would probably recognise you?
Of course, go right ahead, your word is good enough for me to make “exceptions” when everyone ELSE is waiting.
Remember all the Liberal Fuss in the eeevilll Boooosh years over “Cat Stevens” being on the no fly list? Such Media Indignation that HE could possibly be a suspect…..when to anyone younger than 50 its “Cat WHO?”
Names on the list Mr.Yusuf Salam…who ever you “used to be” back in the day is UNKNOWN to anyone looking at the clipboard.
Ditto for some suit in a hurry, claiming to be “too important” to submit to what the rest of us have to go through.
Air Marshals have ID. FBI have ID. U.S. Senators have ID specifically identifying them as Members of Congress. You do not have to know them by face. Duh!
Did you even think at all , before you offered your response? That was just grotesquely stupid. Geez!
Mark
You ignore my disagreement to the comment that “celebrities” should be exempted by these inconveniences we “little people” must submit to. Just because the screener “recognizes” some fool from “jersey shore” shouldnt allow them to skip what we all must otherwise endure.
As for Congress People, they should especially NOT be exempted from these obscenities that we must face. Only when they “bend-over” like the rest of us will they appreciate the futility of this security theater.
You preference for the harassment of the citizenry while simultaneous exempting the “cool, hip, recognizable celebrity and governmental elite” is an impossible position to legitimately defend, please re-read my post and think before lashing out and calling names.
Next time you go through TSA sceening, understand this:
Quran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with WILLING SUBMISSION, and FEEL THEMSELVES SUBDUED.”
Surrender your nail clippers….because of the 9/11 Islamic boxcutter hijackers.
Throw away your water…..because of the Islamic liquid bombers.
Take off your shoes….because of the Islamic shoe bomber.
Take out your laptop….because of the Islamic toner cartridge bombers.
Take off your hat, your jacket, your belt, submit to a body frisk and xray strip search….because of the Islamic underwear bomber.
Submit willingly and feel yourself subdued….Islam has made us all guilty until proven innocent….from the 4’11 hunched over little 90 year old Japanese grandmother on vacation in Hawaii, to the businessman on his way to a meeting, to the atheist hippie on his way to occupy Wall Street, to the Iowa farmer traveling to see his grandchildren, to the Catholic nun dressed in her religious vestments, to the Buddhist monk in his monastic robes, even our little children!
We are all GUILTY OF NOT FOLLOWING ISLAM….so we are forced to submit, by our own politically correct Islamic apologist politicos and law enforcement officers.
SUBMIT WILLINGLY AND FEEL YOURSELF SUBDUED….it is the will of Allah.
~ The Infidel Alliance
“Rules are rules.”
True. Too bad the government ignores them. See the 4th amendment (posted above).
Searches and seizures aren’t supposed to be conducted without warrants AND probable cause. But…they’re doing it anyway.
Wrong, your forgetting one important thing and that is that all of the signs around the terminal tell you that you are subject to search if you proceed and if you proceed after those signs you are giving consent to the possibility of being searched. You are not in your house or car you are in a location where it is implied that you belongings could be searched and the airports isn’t the only place that this happens it also happens in many government buildings. When is the last time you went to a court house and saw that they had metal detectors and x ray machines. I know if I have to go to pay a ticket for parking or anything I have to take everything out of my pockets and run them through an x-ray and then walk through a metal detector and at any point I can decide to not proceed and walk away without being searched.
And therein lies the problem. It is your PERSON that is supposed to be sacrosanct. Everywhere and at every time. Especially at the Courts. They work for us! If they’re doing what we want, why would they be afraid of us?
Answer: they’re not, and they know it.
When idiots say “well the rules were posted”, I wonder how confused we’ve become. Where would such idiotic thinking end? If Obama has signs printed saying, “If you want to fly, you must walk on your hands beckwards”, does that make it fine with you?
If it does, you’re just plain stupid.
We have become their prey. They feed on us. They like us compliant and non-questioning. Pay up, or else. Why do you think there are always cops to roadblock drunk drivers and inspection tags, but none to investigate violent crime? They like both. Violent criminals on the loose make us want more police, and to pay them, they kneecap people who have been drinking and driving, with amounts of alcohol getting ever smaller, whether or not they ever do any harm to anyone. Seatbelt and cell phone laws are merely “revenue enhancement”.
I don’t know whether to be madder at them or the retards who say “Rules are rules”. Smarten up. They don’t believe in rules. They’re just for us rubes. There are only two sets of rules we need: the Ten Commandments, and the Constitution. All else is just abuse of power, one way or the other.
JohnJ, there are too few Americans left like you. The vast majority are sheep who just do what they’re told and throw away their freedom birthright without even a coherent thought.
“Wrong”
No, I’m not wrong. The searches are completely illegal.
“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.”
“When is the last time you went to a court house and saw that they had metal detectors and x ray machines.”
True enough. The powers that be value their own precious skins a lot more than they value an abstraction like the Supreme Law of the Land.
That much is obvious.
Next time you go through TSA screening, understand this:
Quran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with WILLING SUBMISSION, and FEEL THEMSELVES SUBDUED.”
Surrender your nail clippers….because of the 9/11 Islamic boxcutter hijackers.
Throw away your water…..because of the Islamic liquid bombers.
Take off your shoes….because of the Islamic shoe bomber.
Take out your laptop….because of the Islamic toner cartridge bombers.
Take off your hat, your jacket, your belt, submit to a body frisk and x-ray strip search….because of the Islamic underwear bomber.
Submit willingly and feel yourself subdued….Islam has made us all GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, subject to unconstitutional unreasonable search and seizure….from the 4’11 hunched over little 90 year old Japanese grandmother on vacation in Hawaii, to the businessman on his way to a meeting, to the atheist hippie on his way to occupy Wall Street, to the Iowa farmer traveling to see his grandchildren, to the Catholic nun dressed in her religious vestments, to the Buddhist monk in his monastic robes, even our little children!
We are all GUILTY OF NOT FOLLOWING ISLAM….so we are forced to submit, by our own politically correct Islamic apologist bureacrats, politicos and law enforcement officers.
SUBMIT WILLINGLY AND FEEL YOURSELF SUBDUED….it is the will of Allah.
~ The Infidel Alliance
Not too long ago a certain Senator was arrested while looking for a little gay sex in an airport restroom. He tried the “Do You Know Who I Am?” argument on the local cops, who were unimpressed.
He was a republican, cops are union bum democrats that owe their soul (and bennies)to porkulus funding from the DNC.
‘Course they threw the book at him…a non issue, easy peasy, busy work type of “arrest” for the monthly quota, AND a political enemy…whats not to love?
The most frightening thing about TSA is that the government thinks that they are accomplishing something.
I only Bush had requested a declaration of war upon Islam as Roosevelt had requested upon Japan, we all would not be putting up with this crap today.
So correct!
Well, I wouldn’t want to emulate what we did during WWII. The whole country was on rationiing, millions of guys were forced into the armed forces whether they wanted to go or not, thousands of innocent people were rounded up and tossed into concentration camps, and we lost hundreds of thousands dead (plus hundreds of thousands of Filipinos also dead…which never gets talked about because it would make that moron Roosevelt look bad).
We basically were a communist dictatorship for a few years there, during the “Good War”…and, it cost us a lot of lives as well.
The Honorable Senator Paul is too light in coloration. Even a tan would help. My blue eyed blonde wife goes through secondary screening at LAX and the real problem is there are far too many tanned people that don’t speak well. We don’t fly as much as we or I use to because we don’t need the hassle from someone that before 9/11 would have what kind of job? You decide.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Benjamin Franklin
I am not sure about others, but I have seen enough since 911! Simply restore the Constitution, and let US be free again!
The airport pigs/ TSA are the the unneccessary big government response to the bad policy airlines had of handing over their airplanes and passengers to anyone malefactor who demanded it. People who wish to avoid them should eschew commercial airlines.
What, are you arguing that the TSA is _anything but_ mindless and dumber than a planarian worm?
Not gonna win that one…
Meh, the untender attentions of the Touching Scrotums Agency is only for the Small People who are Too Unimportant To Matter.
Your Ruling Class masters in Congress are Too Big Too Fail and are above such petty concepts as the Equality of everyone under the law.
“Let them eat PEAS”
You forgot to mention eleven year old’s with feeding tubes and wheelchairs. My son is in a wheelchair and at airport security I routinely have to submit to a pat down because my son is tube fed, which means we need to bring a days worth of canned food and meds for my son whenever we travel, because if our checked bags don’t arrive, neither does his food or his meds.
So, inquiring minds that try to function above the level of a coma patient want to know, after patting down my eleven year old son, testing his chair for explosives, testing his meds for explosives, x-raying and testing the outside of his factory sealed cans of food, do I have to submit to a pat down even after clearing the x-ray just so we can have the privilege of carrying just enough food to feed him for one day if the airline misplaces our bags.
… BTW, United and US Air have both managed to misplace our bags once each in the last 12 months…
I think that the White House was letting Senator Paul know how much they disliked his stance on PIPA, SOPA and the NDAA. They were showing that while unlimited detention of U.S. citizens is now possible, dear leader also has a catch and release program. Good God, has 90% of America not read the Communist Manifesto, Leviathan or Not a Shot Was Fired? I am not speaking to you, PJ readers, just despairing that so many seem to be unaware of what is going on in this country.
Its the old saying “who gave the monkey a gun?”
Who gave George W. Bush the authority to discard the Fourth Amendment (unreasonable search and Siezure)? Who gave Barack Obama the authority to perpetuate that, and to attack the Tenth Amendment (powers of the States)?
What is the Department of Homeland Security doing invading our local airports, whimsically (and pornographically) irradiating us every time we take a flight?
Who are the TSA’s thugs to do strip searches of citizens?
Of what use is the Department of Homeland Security, when all they do is “oversee” (read, “get in the way of”) the FBI, CIA, ICE, DEA, BATFE and the Coast Guard?
Why do we need to spend billions of dollars on what amounts to a huge duplication of effort that provides loads of political patronage jobs?
Maybe we should all be a bitm louder in asking how all of this governmentalization of our perdonal lives is morally justified
Please forgive the sloppy typing.
What would you do if the TSA (by executive order) started taking blood samples from all passengers to detect illegal drugs in their system? The rationale being that unruly passengers are known to have been under the influence of various substances and the safety of the airplane crew is at stake. Oh, it will be just a small prick, like a glucose meter, nothing to worry about. Then of course the government has all passengers DNA on file, in Washington, at DHS, just for safety reasons. Right.
TSA Gate Rape – It’s not just for children anymore.