If this violates the 4th Amendment, so do sobriety checkpoints & random drug screening. How many rights are you willing to give up to protect you from what?
Chur., your quote doesn’t contradict Trout’s remark. Bush-Dick launched these full-body scanners and violated our rights in much worse ways with his “Paranoid” Act.
President Obama, after the Christmas attempt of last year, has permitted T.S.A. to follow through with these scanners, as they were doing already.
Repubs are calling to “privatize” the process, and have contractors, like the ones working on 9/11 run the show. It was THAT failure that allowed Bush/Cheney with Lieberman et al, to bring about a totally irrational reorganization called “Homeland Security”, and TSA. The policies from this period were laid out, and implementing these latest incantations, hmm, that’s the proper word, makes little sense. Fear of witchcraft was a powerful means to destroy people’s freedoms and lives, and we’re only a step away, again.
Metal detectors and “sniffers” do work, without being as intrusive, or degrading, as these very expensive machines, with the “option” of degrading “random” pat downs, that are NOT based on probable cause. I’ve had nail clippers in my vest show up quite well when the vest, not me, went through the x-ray machine. My son’s boot (combat) set off the chemical sniffer at the airport. His other foot was in a cast, and he admitted that yes, he’d been around explosives- thus residue on his combat boot, and his military I.D. was sufficient proof of who he was. When the “sniffer” alerted, a few simple questions sufficed to clarify the situation.
As a steward, I prepared the initial case that went on to the Supreme Court to prohibit “random” drug testing without probable cause. If the person’s job specifically entailed safety, as in pilots and drivers where even then, “probable cause” was preferred, safety did carry more weight. We won that case, but it’s been pushed aside.
The issue of invasive searches IS the “thing” with the Fourth Amendment. Observed behaviors, like a vehicle weaving in the case of a drunk driver, or particular characteristic mannerisms at airports, CAN alert trained people to warrant a question or two to begin with. If those questions do NOT have viable answers- then “probable cause” to go further may appear. But RANDOM searches, of children, 80 year old ladies, or multiple amputees in wheelchairs(like some of my veteran friends), ARE invasion of privacy, and neither needed for airline “safety”, nor sound practices.
Bush may have plagiarized enough to have a book ghost written, and I’m definitely NOT pleased with everything Obama has done, like allowing Bush policies to continue, but he IS President now, and it’s time the “loyal opposition” realized it isn’t 1941 anymore, and the needs of the nation are greater than the needs of their personal greed, venality, or vendettas.
I’m a bit confused here… the conservative cartoonists are being ridiculed by liberal posters who, in theory, are FOR the message of the cartoon (i.e. protecting personal freedoms); meanwhile, the conservative posters disagree with the conservative cartoonists, insisting that as much as they hate liberals, they are still in favor of sacrificing personal freedoms out of fear? that’s how it seems to me anyways. (though I may be confusing the political leanings of some of the posters)
I personally feel that this, as well as DUI checkpoints and random drug tests, do violate the 4th amendment, and agree with dtroutma on the “probable cause” issue.
gore bane…how many terrorist plots to blow up an airline flight has the TSA exposed by the personal violations of elderly, children, ordinary citizens, wheelchair passengers, and Western profile citizens???? How many arrests have been made of actual terrorists after body scanning and pat downs????
I think the answer is NONE….ZERO…..they have merely collected personal items on the “suspect” lists.
H.Security and TSA need to do TERRORIST PROFILING, relying on known exposed terrorists profiles, as the Police do in Criminal cases.
p.s. capture of Osama will not stop the Global Jihad by thousands of dedicated terrorists, whose ranks fill up quickly after the West downs Jihadist leaders…..
we just need sensible and sane and successful detection of suspects in the hunt for terrorists.
Dtroutma over 13 years ago
Wow, something the Bush administration set in motion (like the machines) is finally waking up the “righty” ‘toonists.
SherriannPederson over 13 years ago
When did they start scanning for large metal objects?
thekingster over 13 years ago
won’t have any problem dumping sociobama
comYics over 13 years ago
Sexual harrassment on adults and children.
Maybe capturing Obama…Osama and collecting your $25 million reward will stop the abuse.
ponytail56 over 13 years ago
I hate to say it but the liberal loonies are correct. but even a broken clock is right twice a day
ChukLitl Premium Member over 13 years ago
If this violates the 4th Amendment, so do sobriety checkpoints & random drug screening. How many rights are you willing to give up to protect you from what?
BrianCrook over 13 years ago
Chur., your quote doesn’t contradict Trout’s remark. Bush-Dick launched these full-body scanners and violated our rights in much worse ways with his “Paranoid” Act.
President Obama, after the Christmas attempt of last year, has permitted T.S.A. to follow through with these scanners, as they were doing already.
Dtroutma over 13 years ago
Repubs are calling to “privatize” the process, and have contractors, like the ones working on 9/11 run the show. It was THAT failure that allowed Bush/Cheney with Lieberman et al, to bring about a totally irrational reorganization called “Homeland Security”, and TSA. The policies from this period were laid out, and implementing these latest incantations, hmm, that’s the proper word, makes little sense. Fear of witchcraft was a powerful means to destroy people’s freedoms and lives, and we’re only a step away, again.
Metal detectors and “sniffers” do work, without being as intrusive, or degrading, as these very expensive machines, with the “option” of degrading “random” pat downs, that are NOT based on probable cause. I’ve had nail clippers in my vest show up quite well when the vest, not me, went through the x-ray machine. My son’s boot (combat) set off the chemical sniffer at the airport. His other foot was in a cast, and he admitted that yes, he’d been around explosives- thus residue on his combat boot, and his military I.D. was sufficient proof of who he was. When the “sniffer” alerted, a few simple questions sufficed to clarify the situation.
As a steward, I prepared the initial case that went on to the Supreme Court to prohibit “random” drug testing without probable cause. If the person’s job specifically entailed safety, as in pilots and drivers where even then, “probable cause” was preferred, safety did carry more weight. We won that case, but it’s been pushed aside.
The issue of invasive searches IS the “thing” with the Fourth Amendment. Observed behaviors, like a vehicle weaving in the case of a drunk driver, or particular characteristic mannerisms at airports, CAN alert trained people to warrant a question or two to begin with. If those questions do NOT have viable answers- then “probable cause” to go further may appear. But RANDOM searches, of children, 80 year old ladies, or multiple amputees in wheelchairs(like some of my veteran friends), ARE invasion of privacy, and neither needed for airline “safety”, nor sound practices.
Bush may have plagiarized enough to have a book ghost written, and I’m definitely NOT pleased with everything Obama has done, like allowing Bush policies to continue, but he IS President now, and it’s time the “loyal opposition” realized it isn’t 1941 anymore, and the needs of the nation are greater than the needs of their personal greed, venality, or vendettas.
person918 over 13 years ago
I’m a bit confused here… the conservative cartoonists are being ridiculed by liberal posters who, in theory, are FOR the message of the cartoon (i.e. protecting personal freedoms); meanwhile, the conservative posters disagree with the conservative cartoonists, insisting that as much as they hate liberals, they are still in favor of sacrificing personal freedoms out of fear? that’s how it seems to me anyways. (though I may be confusing the political leanings of some of the posters)
I personally feel that this, as well as DUI checkpoints and random drug tests, do violate the 4th amendment, and agree with dtroutma on the “probable cause” issue.
WarBush over 13 years ago
I’m amazed that Ramirez actually understands the 4th amendment.
Equally as amazing are the people who want cameras and searches all over the place because a terrorist might strike.
Psychological profiling: Just do it!
disgustedtaxpayer over 13 years ago
gore bane…how many terrorist plots to blow up an airline flight has the TSA exposed by the personal violations of elderly, children, ordinary citizens, wheelchair passengers, and Western profile citizens???? How many arrests have been made of actual terrorists after body scanning and pat downs????
I think the answer is NONE….ZERO…..they have merely collected personal items on the “suspect” lists.
H.Security and TSA need to do TERRORIST PROFILING, relying on known exposed terrorists profiles, as the Police do in Criminal cases.
p.s. capture of Osama will not stop the Global Jihad by thousands of dedicated terrorists, whose ranks fill up quickly after the West downs Jihadist leaders…..
we just need sensible and sane and successful detection of suspects in the hunt for terrorists.
CorosiveFrog Premium Member over 13 years ago
^Once their figurehead is gone, Jihadists may well lose their momentum.
No terrorist stopped? Not that many TRIED.
pirate227 over 13 years ago
Yea, Ramirez finally gets one right!