Sen. Paul planning round 2 vs TSA

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by KrazyKat, Jan 31, 2013.

  1. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    Planning to reintroduce legislation
  2. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    I applaud his efforts to keep this issue alive.
  3. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    "frequent flyers" - leaving the poor once or twice a year fliers to take all the abuse the TSA can heap on them.

    Everyone should expect "expedited screening" unless there are articulable reasons for a more thorough search.
    Fisher1949 likes this.
  4. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    That's the problem I see too.

    I used to be an occasional flyer. I don't have to fly for work (thankfully, or else I'd be out of a job) and while I really, genuinely love my job and my company, working for a small business doesn't net me the pay or time off to be a big-time jet-setter. I'd be up (expletive deleted) creek just like before.

    The other thing that caught my eye:

    No deal, no cookie. I'd consider flying again tomorrow if I could have the simple guarantee that I would not be touched no matter what I chose to do. If rejecting the pornoscanner meant a simple HHMD wanding, I'd have no problem with it. If going through a (MMW) pornoscanner meant a 100% guarantee of no unwelcome physical contact from strangers, I'd be (more) okay (than now) with that.

    That's the problem. I know I've said it before, but it bears repeating. There are no sure things with TSA, and for an autistic person (even a high-functioning Aspie), that is completely and totally unacceptable. There MUST be predictability. All this talk of "random and unpredictable" induces tremendous anxiety in people like me. They clearly have no idea what they're doing to people who need to feel in control of themselves and their situations in order to stay calm and composed and not risk melting down in a public place (thus garnering massive negative attention from strangers, compounding the problem, and so on). They haven't thought about it even once.

    I hope these bills pass. I hope massive numbers of TSA clerks-not-officers-not-agents go to prison. I hope they're made savage, uncompromising examples of, and that the last things they ever feel are glass knives and a cold tile floor. And I hope every other carbon-based lifeform who works for TSA is so terrified to go to work every day thereafter that they need to take taxis from their own houses because their hands are shaking too hard to control their own vehicles.
    Fisher1949 likes this.
  5. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    Me too. But then, I've always enjoyed Cervantes.
    Caradoc likes this.
  6. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    As usual, Becky's not buying into it (Pssst, Rand: Here's My Suggestion):

    "Privatizing" the TSA is an unforgivable scam Our Rulers perpetrate on the agency's victims. It sounds good, doesn't it, with its implication that the feds will turn aviation's security over to the private sector. But that's not how it works. The TSA remains firmly in charge, setting policies such as gate-rape and irradiation and supervising "private" thugs as they grope and X-ray serfs. Those assailants are the only "private" aspect of "privatization": personnel agencies would hire them out to the TSA, just as a temp agency hires out receptionists and secretaries. Said receptionists and secretaries do whatever the boss at the client's tells them to, and so would the "private" bullies the TSA employs. The unconstitutional searches at unconstitutional checkpoints would continue apace; blue-shirted goons would abuse passengers just as they do now; flyers wouldn't notice any difference at all. Indeed, something like 17 airports nationwide are already "privatized": do you know whether you've passed through one? Neither does anyone else because they are identical to "non-privatized" ones. This is precisely the situation that prevailed on 9/11, though then it was the FAA rather than the TSA dictating to "private" screeners. Which explains why the fedbugs--sorry, Al Qaeda was able to pull off the murder of 3000 people.

    Ah, but don't worry: Rand will provide travelers with a "bill of rights" as well. Thanks, but I'll take the original with its iron-clad guarantee that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." {Emphasis most emphatically added.)

Share This Page