One step forward, one step back

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Mike, Aug 18, 2011.

  1. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Canton Rep: One step forward, one step back

    Never mind that Automated Target Recognition (ATR) has been shown to be ineffective. The Germans even ditched their Nude-O-Scopes after they evaluated it.

    We really need to start confronting this "flying is a privilege" nonsense. I have placed a copy of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kent v. Dulles in our Court Decisions area. If you repeat a lie often enough, people start to believe it.

    The article also laments that at one Ohio airport, international passengers on inbound private aircraft now have to waste an extra 1-2 hours dealing with immigration at their facility instead of having immigration visit them. Welcome to the real world.
     
    Cartoon Peril likes this.
  2. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Here again in the linked article is the despicable Susan Estrich argument made that because none of us are attractive enough to be nude models, we have no reason to object to being scoped by a dope. Also the term "privacy" is used, again to blame the prudish I suppose:

     
    DeafBlonde likes this.
  3. DeafBlonde

    DeafBlonde Original Member

    For the record: Flying is a RIGHT. Getting to see me naked is a PRIVILEGE !!

    'Nuff said...
     
  4. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Unfortunately in my case I can no longer say that, if I ever could.
     
  5. DeafBlonde

    DeafBlonde Original Member

    Sure you can! I meant that not in the egotistical sense*, but rather in the sense that I (and only I) choose who gets to see me naked, whether it be a doctor or someone with whom I am deeply in love.

    *Egotistical sense: "Anyone would feel privileged to see me naked."
     
    Cartoon Peril likes this.
  6. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    The U.S. Supreme Court (with the majority opinion delivered by William O. Douglas) would agree with you. Here is the complete text of Kent v. Dulles.

    Kent v. Dulles was delivered in the 1950's, when most travel to destinations contemnplated in the decision was by sea rather than by air. By the end of the 1960's, almost all of the large ocean liners had been scrapped, and the only to reach those destinations ever since has been by air.
     
    Cartoon Peril likes this.
  7. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    What was I thinking?! (hand smacks head) ;-o
     
  8. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Money quote however for us is:
     
  9. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Connie Schultz is married to a Congressman, is she not? She and I had a go 'round when TSA did it's PR thing in Cleveland when WBI made its appearance there.
     
  10. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    I don't know anything about that. Don't see how any newspaper columnist can conclude what the images look like any better than anyone else, and porn or not porn is not the issue. As I said in other posts, that's like only requiring search warrants for the rich man's mansion and not the poor man's shack.
     
  11. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    I honestly don't recall what I wrote to her, but I believe I asked her if the press was allowed to watch regular passengers going through WBI or if they were TSA "volunteers" going through? She did not respond to my question and cut me off with a statement to the effect of: "I know what your agenda is and I'm not going to discuss it."
     
    Cartoon Peril likes this.
  12. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Of course that was just her way of saying "shut up yer face"
     
    Doober likes this.
  13. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    Okay, so question: Would it be better to reference Kent v. Dulles or quote 49 USC S40103(a)(2) when reminding people that flying is a right and not a privilege? I've been using 49 USC S40103(a)(2) thus far but if SCOTUS decisions carry more argumentative "oomph" then I'll happily switch to that. Or double-whammy the AFSers with both.
     
  14. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Both -- the Supreme Court decision is harder to unravel, USC is clearer and reinforces the Supreme Court decision.
     

Share This Page