Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Fisher1949, Dec 8, 2011.
"I didn't punch you, your face accelerated into my fist."
I didn't punch you, I high fived your face!
Looks like the new rape definition is a done deal.
US broadens definition of rape; includes male victims
There seem to be a few ways this will go down with regard to the TSA
1. No change. No one litigates.
2. It's litigated and we win.
3. It's litigated and we lose.
In the case of #1 or #3 the argument that the TSA makes is something along the lines of 'you consented so it's not rape', or 'it's an administrative search so it's not rape'. Either argument is repugnant as it is arguing that 'rape is not rape'.
Thoughts on this? Is this a battle that can be won in the media?
I don't see what there is to litigate. This is not a legal definition or crime, just a long overdue classification established by the FBI to ensure uniform & accurate reporting of crime data by the states. The previous definition was way too limited -- anything other than what might be described best described as "forced traditional sex" did not count as rape.
Where it will help is in the area of public opinion, as people come to understand that what TSA's perverts are doing now is exactly the same thing that local law enforcement is reporting to Washington as "rape". As much as I hate to overuse this expression, step #1 should be to "think about the children" and drive the point home: TSA is raping our children.
And while you're at, you can stop raping my grandmother, too, and quite frankly I don't like being raped myself, now that I've thought it over.
Children under the age of consent cannot consent to sex, let alone to rape, nor can adults consent for them. The same applies to vulnerable adults, a category that many of those groped grandmas might easily fall into.
We should start with a focus on the extremes -- the children and the elderly and work to narrow the gap inbetween until TSA is no longer raping anyone.
This definition is long overdue. It brings the Federal definition of rape in line with the common understanding of rape. Rape has nothing to do with the gender of the victim or the perpetrator. If the TSA pervs have the sense God gave geese, they'll be a bit more cautious about the way they poke under other people's garments, particularly underwear. A rude diget thrust too forcefully into a crotch could lead to a charge of rape, as it should.
No weapons have been discovered in passengers' underpants. There's no reason for TSA goons to root around our crotches. Hopefully they'll start to see this penchant as risky to their own liberty, which is as it should be.
Amusing that the FBI's new definition ensnares the methods of their former Pistole. This may be quite the inside joke for those that worked under him in Seattle.
At least these acts have been defined as rape by a Federal agency which will create a dilemma for the courts.
These definitions are lumped in with rape and sodomy so if the courts excuse these as "administrative searches" they risk exposing passengers to other more aggressive sex crimes at the whim of a TSA screener without recourse.
Maybe they are relying on the Ventura defense, claiming the suit must be brought before the Court of Appeals even though no trial could be tried in a lower court.
Separate names with a comma.