TSA Finds Gun-Stuffed Mickey Mouse in Four Year-Old's Luggage

Then they are coming into those areas through an employee’s access, which does not allow public access. Again, this is a rule, if an employee, doesn’t matter if it’s the president of the airlines, exits the secured area into the public terminal, and has access to the public, then they return through the public area, they must go through the screening procedure just like everyone else. The only professional courtesy they receive is that they often have a separate line that they can go through since they do not have time to wait in the normal public access line.

You bet that if a TSA employee goes to lunch, or comes to work, and enters through the public terminal they have to go through the public screening process, just like passengers do. I used to see them coming back from lunch all the time getting patted down by their fellow employees. I used to think it was a silly process, but I understood why they had to do it.

If I left the ramp, went upstairs into the gate area, as long as I stayed in the gates, I was fine. If I had to go into the terminal via the gate, then return into the gate, I also had to be screened. It was a major PITA too, as I was a ramp supervisor and often had ramp equipment all over my person (bypass pins, wands, radios, interphones, etc). Now places I had to get to fast, then back, we had special access areas that had little to no public access so we were allowed to go into there as we were not exposed to the public in the terminal for any length of time.

take things out of context much?
The actual quote in context:

More than a decade after 9/11, it is a national embarrassment that our airport security system remains so hopelessly bureaucratic and disconnected from the people whom it is meant to protect.

Originally posted by pianopraze
Total dodge.
You said:

Originally posted by defcon5
I have news for you, you waive your constitutional rights when you purchase and airline ticket.

We do not waive our constitutional rights.

Yes you do…
You waive your rights via contract all the time, even though you may not be aware of it. Just as an example when you enter a place of business that has a sign that says “no shirt, no shoes, no business”, you’re waiving your constitutional rights.

In other words you are agreeing to follow their rules by patronizing them. Airlines CoC’s actually write this out in legal terms for you:

For example:

RULE 1: General Provisions
A. Contract of Carriage
When you buy a ticket for travel on Delta, you enter into a contract of carriage with us. The terms of your contract are set forth in:
*your Ticket
*these Conditions of Carriage
*our published fare rules and regulations, which may govern the calculation of the fare and other
charges that apply to your itinerary. If your ticket is priced by delta.com, a Delta agent, or a
computer reservation system, these fare rules and regulations will be included in the calculation of the ticket price that we quote to you.

You are entering into a business contract, and part of your “consideration” is that you will submit to their security screening rules.
If you don’t understand what a contract is, start out here:

Contract
A contract is an agreement entered into voluntarily by two parties or more with the intention of creating a legal obligation, which may have elements in writing, though contracts can be made orally. The remedy for breach of contract can be "damages" or compensation of money. In equity, the remedy can be specific performance of the contract or an injunction. Both of these remedies award the party at loss the "benefit of the bargain" or expectation damages, which are greater than mere reliance damages, as in promissory estoppel. The parties may be natural persons or juristic persons. A contract is a legally enforceable promise or undertaking that something will or will not occur. The word promise can be used as a legal synonym for contract.[1], although care is required as a promise may not have the full standing of a contract, as when it is an agreement without consideration.

This is law 101. Contract law is about is basic as the law gets.

Originally posted by pianopraze
And you are advocating we be restricted when we travel by bus, plane, on public roads?

No, you cannot compare your right to travel as a passenger on the road system to flying. The two are not the same thing. Flight is not protected under your “right to locomotion” traveling on the road system is. Now, you cannot operate a motor vehicle on the road system unless you enter into a contract with the state to receive an operator’s permit, this is not covered under your “right to locomotion”, you can however travel at will as a passenger. Right to locomotion generally only covers movement by human physical means (bikes, walking, etc.), and the ability to travel as a passenger dependent on any additional rules required by the vehicles operator (eg. the Contract of Carriage).

Originally posted by pianopraze
If you can not see this, or if you support it I have no respect for you as a person.

I personally don’t care if you respect me or not, I have spent a year researching into this due to my personal refusal to be tagged by the FL Real ID act RFID facial scanning, and fingerprinting. The FL Real ID actually IS unconstitutional, because not only do they include it in the “optional” drivers license, but also in a state ID that is required by police on demand. ATM the trick to getting around their system is to get a passport card, but you surrender the right to drive…

the minute a police officer “takes me in” for my refusal of handing him a FL issued state ID on demand, I’ll sue them sideways for infringement of my freedom of religion.

You see, when it comes to the law, the devil is in the details. It’s not what you believe that the spirit of the law means, it’s really about what the terminology of the law actually is. Little details like the difference between “operating” and “traveling” are important, and you have to pick your battles and timing.

So right now, I have not “operated” a motor vehicle in close to a year because the terms of their licensure conflict with my religious beliefs. As long as they leave it at that, nothing has been violated. I chose not to do business with them, and they have to respect my choice. The minute they take away my freedom to chose not to enter into that contract, and force me to present a license or ID that is against my beliefs/choice, THEN they violate my rights and I’ll sue the pants off them.

Understand?