TSA, does it have the right?

Originally posted by WhatTheory
The entire method and thinking of the TSA screening process is BS.

I am a US citizen and I don't need to be treated like a criminal just because I want to take a flight. The TSA rules are assuming that I am a terrorist so I must be scanned, searched and groped. Why is the Federal Government involved to begin with?

Airlines are private businesses and should be able to provide their own security.

And the airlines are legally allowed to opt out of the TSA program if they like. That's why we also need to complain to the airlines and airports directly. We need to explain to them that they will lose our money unless they comply.

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Please see above bolded text, a physical pat down is not intended to cause injury so it wouldn't be classed as assault.

You missed this part

Simple assault can be distinguished without the intent of injury upon another person. The violation of one's personal space or touching in a way the victim deemed inappropriate can be simple assault.

If you attempted to pat me down, you'd be touching me without my permission and be guilty of an assault.
And yes I'd press charges.

Nope, because you already know that you may be subject to a pat down search if you fly and obviously have to visit an airport so therefore you cannot press charges as you have the right not to fly and no be patted down.

Not really that difficult is it?

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Ermmm, but what if you are a terrorist? How do they know you are not?

How do the police know whether or not you're not a murderer? rapist? etc.. ?

"Profiling is the answer"

Have you any idea of the computing power and time it would take to profile every single person that walks through an airport on a daily basis???

Israel does it without a problem.
Computing power? Profiling mostly involves trained agents. If they're willing to spend 100's of millions of dollars on useless machines to see our junk, why not spend that money on things that actually will work and have been proven effective?
You don't seem to be able to answer that question though????

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Nope, because you already know that you may be subject to a pat down search if you fly and obviously have to visit an airport so therefore you cannot press charges as you have the right not to fly and no be patted down.

Not really that difficult is it?

No that's not the context you put with regard to your attempted assault on me.
You said you'd like to pat me down right now
If you don't have my permission to pat me down right now, you're assaulting me. If you assault me, you go to jail.
Now above and beyond that, at some point, I guarantee someone will file assault charges against a TSA agent and it will end up in court.

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Ermmm, but what if you are a terrorist?

That is a lame argument to assume a person is guilty since 99.99999% of people are not terrorists.

Have you any idea of the computing power and time it would take to profile every single person that walks through an airport on a daily basis???

If Israel has the computing power then I am sure we could handle it. Besides, most of the screening can be done before the person even enters the airport.
For example: If granny takes a flight every year at Christmas to the same location, I'm sure the airlines know this by looking at her past history. Give her a fast track ticket to bypass the insanity. Who is more likely to be a terrorist, granny or a young person from yemen on a visa?

Another point:

Pilots should not be exempt either. If the TSA is going to continue these insane rules then everyone must be subject to them including pilots and congressmen.

If the TSA is going to assume I am a terrorist then the TSA should assume a pilot is a drug smuggler and should go through the same procedures.

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Nope, because you already know that you may be subject to a pat down search if you fly and obviously have to visit an airport so therefore you cannot press charges as you have the right not to fly and no be patted down.

Not really that difficult is it?

No that's not the context you put with regard to your attempted assault on me.
You said you'd like to pat me down right now

If you don't have my permission to pat me down right now, you're assaulting me. If you assault me, you go to jail.
Now above and beyond that, at some point, I guarantee someone will file assault charges against a TSA agent and it will end up in court.

But your argument wasn't against me personally wanting to pat you down, it was against a TSA employee at the airport.

reply to post by WhatTheory


Security measures are not an assumption, theyre a proactive approach to preventing crime. Just because your subjected or might be subjected to a pat down search doesn't mean anyone thinks your actually guility, it's just a pre-emptive approach.

Once again, not difficult to understand.

Originally posted by WhatTheory
Another point:

Pilots should not be exempt either. If the TSA is going to continue these insane rules then everyone must be subject to them including pilots and congressmen.

If the TSA is going to assume I am a terrorist then the TSA should assume a pilot is a drug smuggler and should go through the same procedures.

Oh I guarantee you the first time a group of congressmen get groped, or one of their naked pictures with his tiny wee wee ends up on the net, this program will be over. That's why everyone who ok'ed this should be required to go through it.

Originally posted by Death_Kron

But your argument wasn't against me personally wanting to pat you down, it was against a TSA employee at the airport.

No you're the one that made it personal by suggesting that you were going to try and pat me down without my permission. You're not a TSA agent are you? Of course you aren't
You made it personal, I just responded.

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by WhatTheory

 

Security measures are not an assumption, theyre a proactive approach to preventing crime. Just because your subjected or might be subjected to a pat down search doesn't mean anyone thinks your actually guility, it's just a pre-emptive approach.

Once again, not difficult to understand.

Then why aren't they using security measures that actually work?
Why won't you answer that question?

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by WhatTheory

 

Security measures are not an assumption, theyre a proactive approach to preventing crime. Just because your subjected or might be subjected to a pat down search doesn't mean anyone thinks your actually guility, it's just a pre-emptive approach.

Once again, not difficult to understand.

Then why aren't they using security measures that actually work?
Why won't you answer that question?

They are doing mate but people like you seem to have a problem with it....

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Security measures are not an assumption, theyre a proactive approach to preventing crime. Just because your subjected or might be subjected to a pat down search doesn't mean anyone thinks your actually guility, it's just a pre-emptive approach.

Once again, not difficult to understand.

Using your flawed logic, you would be ok with people coming to your home and searching it for no reason right? You could be building a bomb, have someone tied up in your basement or growing pot in your house so it must be searched.
I mean, it would only be a security measure and a proactive approach to preventing crime.

Your argument is so lame its funny. I'm sure you understand the point of illegal search and seizure right?

But you are right, it's not difficult to understand so why are you having so much trouble with it?

Originally posted by jfj123
Then why aren't they using security measures that actually work?
Why won't you answer that question?

I just noticed that Kron is from the UK. They are already a police state and he has already been brainwashed into believing this is ok and normal. It's not his fault because he probably has grown up with this state and hence thinks that it is normal so I don't fault him for believing what he says.

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Security measures are not an assumption, theyre a proactive approach to preventing crime. Just because your subjected or might be subjected to a pat down search doesn't mean anyone thinks your actually guility, it's just a pre-emptive approach.

Once again, not difficult to understand.

Using your flawed logic, you would be ok with people coming to your home and searching it for no reason right? You could be building a bomb, have someone tied up in your basement or growing pot in your house so it must be searched.
I mean, it would only be a security measure and a proactive approach to preventing crime.

Your argument is so lame its funny. I'm sure you understand the point of illegal search and seizure right?

But you are right, it's not difficult to understand so why are you having so much trouble with it?

Although you might find this hard to believe, my home doesn't have thousands of people passing through it on a daily basis.

People in airports are not being searched for no reason, they are being searched in case they are carrying weapons or other illegal contraband.

If there was reasonable suspicion to search my house then I would happily let the police in to look around.

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by jfj123
Then why aren't they using security measures that actually work?
Why won't you answer that question?

I just noticed that Kron is from the UK. They are already a police state and he has already been brainwashed into believing this is ok and normal. It's not his fault because he probably has grown up with this state and hence thinks that it is normal so I don't fault him for believing what he says.

Have you ever been to the UK?

It's not a police state in the way your implying, the police over here are a joke and I'll admit that my personal belief is that they are doing everything wrong, however I still wouldn't object to a pat down search.

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Although you might find this hard to believe, my home doesn't have thousands of people passing through it on a daily basis.

Irrelevant. The amount of people is a moot point.
Either you have rights or not. But as I stated in a previous post I see you are from the UK and you would not understand these things since the UK is practically a police state. This is why you have a hard time understanding fundamental rights as a citizen.

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Although you might find this hard to believe, my home doesn't have thousands of people passing through it on a daily basis.

Irrelevant. The amount of people is a moot point.
Either you have rights or not. But as I stated in a previous post I see you are from the UK and you would not understand these things since the UK is practically a police state. This is why you have a hard time understanding fundamental rights as a citizen.

A moot point? Really?

So by that reasoning you believe the value of one life is just as valuable as the lives of a thousand, so why don't you support protocols put into place to save that just one life in airports?

Originally posted by Death_Kron
They are doing mate but people like you seem to have a problem with it....

They're not actually using measures that are effective.
It's not security but security theatre.
Big difference.

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by jfj123
Then why aren't they using security measures that actually work?
Why won't you answer that question?

I just noticed that Kron is from the UK. They are already a police state and he has already been brainwashed into believing this is ok and normal. It's not his fault because he probably has grown up with this state and hence thinks that it is normal so I don't fault him for believing what he says.

Ah ok that makes sense.
Too bad. I used to like the UK
Sad to see it go down hill so far