Ron Paul Responds to TSA: Introduces 'American Traveler Dignity Act'

[rtsy]

The man seems somewhat upset.

[SunsRocketsfan]

Dr Paul is awesome!

[thadeus]

This is a good idea that I can support.

[KingCheetah]

Give me a f'ing break -- walk through the x-ray.

[Rashmon]

Originally Posted by KingCheetah Give me a f'ing break -- walk through the x-ray.

Exactly.

[Cohete Rojo]

And the big deal is...?

[MiddleMan]

Originally Posted by Cohete Rojo And the big deal is...?

radiation exposure

[CrazyDave]

Originally Posted by Cohete Rojo And the big deal is...?

The systematic removal of our rights all in the name of making us safer, which we aren't.

[Rashmon]

Originally Posted by CrazyDave The systematic removal of our rights all in the name of making us safer, which we aren't.

Except this is not a removal of rights any more than walking through a metal detector.

If you don't want someone "touching your junk," walk through the scanner.

[rhadamanthus]

Originally Posted by Rashmon Except this is not a removal of rights any more than walking through a metal detector.

Umm, yes it is.

[Rashmon]

Originally Posted by rhadamanthus Umm, yes it is.

While I tend to side with you philosophically, this is the real world, and I don't want someone's philosophy decreasing my safety.

There are two options in this situation, pat-down and scanner, and if you turn down one you better be ready to accept the other.

What right is being denied? What is your alternative?

[rhadamanthus]

Originally Posted by Rashmon While I tend to side with you philosophically, this is the real world, and I don't want someone's philosophy decreasing my safety.

You honestly feel safer with this stuff? With report after report and article after article condemning and verifying it as little more than theater with the handy benefit of making some folks very wealthy?

Even if you don't buy that, huge lines to get through security strike me as an easy place to kill a few hundred people with a suicide bomb. Where do you draw the line at this stupidity?

There are two options in this situation, pat-down and scanner, and if you turn down one you better be ready to accept the other.

There is most certainly another set of options:

1) Don't fly - if enough people do this, trust me, the "security" will go away very fast.
2) Change the rules to something less ridiculous.
3) Can the TSA and the whole department of homeland security as a giant cluster**** of money-wasting. (my preference)

What right is being denied? What is your alternative?

Right? A very nebulous term... Ignoring long philosophical or legal arguments, what is being denied is my "right" or my "preference" for rational and effective travel.

My preferred alternative would be to go back to what we had pre-9/11. Everything since then has been enormously expensive with virtually no tangible benefit.

[mc mark]

[Rashmon]

Originally Posted by rhadamanthus ...There is most certainly another set of options: 1) Don't fly - if enough people do this, trust me, the "security" will go away very fast. 2) Change the rules to something less ridiculous. 3) Can the TSA and the whole department of homeland security as a giant cluster**** of money-wasting. (my preference) ...

1. Don't fly...unlikely
2. Change the rules...always an option...in every situation where rules exist
3. Reassess Homeland Security cluster****...Agreed

You do make some good points regarding crowds as a target. Anywhere a crowd exists.

All the more reason to seek ways to protect our safety in non-invasive convenient manners.

Like some sort of a passive scanner that you just walk through. Kind of like a metal detector, or some other type of scanner that looks at your whole body.

[DonnyMost]

I really don't see what the big deal is.

Maybe if the government wasn't involved people would stfu?

[rhadamanthus]

Originally Posted by DonnyMost I really don't see what the big deal is.

The big deal is the wastefulness and stupidity inherent to each of these new "security" measures. I have to give up my time, my privacy, and my ability to rationally analyze the situation. More to the point, I have to pay for it.

It's silly, stupid, and without any redeeming value. That's a big deal.

[jo mama]

reading some of yalls comments here is really depressing.

you are the 'cattle' that paul is referring to at the end of the video.

[DonnyMost]

Originally Posted by rhadamanthus The big deal is the wastefulness and stupidity inherent to each of these new "security" measures. I have to give up my time, my privacy, and my ability to rationally analyze the situation. More to the point, I have to pay for it. It's silly, stupid, and without any redeeming value. That's a big deal.

Would it bother you if this was fully controlled by a private airline and you paid for the security in the cost of your ticket?

[rhadamanthus]

Originally Posted by Rashmon What right is being denied?

I don't claim credit for this, but it's spot on:

WTF is up with this "flying is not a right" "driving is not a right" "the internet is not a right" stuff? The Constitution doesn't tell us what our rights ARE, it tells us what the government CAN'T do. Just because it doesn't mention airplanes, cars, or the internet doesn't mean we shouldn't have the freedom to make up our own damn mind about what we want to do. The right to fly on a plane (if the plane is yours or agrees to carry you) is a part of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The right to drive on taxpayer-funded roads is part of the right to life, liberty, and happiness. The government doesn't tell us what our rights are or aren't. The founding fathers espoused the belief that our rights are inherent to our humanity, that they transcend governmental decisions, and that they cannot be taken away without due process of law. The Constitution is also very clear about limits on what "due process of law" means - you can't be searched, and you can't have your papers (including computers, documents, or files) searched either, not without a warrant. They aren't allowed to mass-print warrants without evidence that a crime has occurred or is about to occur - *evidence*, not suspicion. The TSA's actions are completely, utterly, and without recourse illegal under the laws described in the US Constitution. Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn't provide average citizens with any way to punish the people in power who perform these illegal acts or who mandate that these illegal acts be performed. Treason doesn't apply here, as much as I wish it did. We can't bring criminal charges against them, because a) courts won't hear cases brought by private citizens. Only a prosecutor can bring charges, and none of them will. b) any court cases involving these acts will be refused on the basis of national security, which is also illegal to do.

All that needed to be done post 9/11 was accomplished when they fortified the cockpit doors. The only reason the attacks on 9/11 were so outrageously successful was that no one had tried it before.

To what lengths are you willing to go in the name of your abused obedience to unnecessary authority?

A terrorist could put explosives up his ass, he could bring anthrax spores on the plane in an envelope, he could very easily short the batteries on a laptop. Heck, as reporter after reporter and report after report has confirmed, you can still get knives on a plane without too much difficulty.

Stop being such pansies. If someone wants to kill you, there's not much you can really do about it after a certain practical point. Be vigilant, be concerned, be constructive and reasonable. But don't be an irrational nitwit. That just makes life miserable for no reason.

[rhadamanthus]

Originally Posted by DonnyMost Would it bother you if this was fully controlled by a private airline and you paid for the security in the cost of your ticket?

Yes, it's still dumb and I'm still paying for it. And a private corporation could not do this because they would be sued into oblivion.