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

Say, "Damn sparkyfagtastic, what would you do if I told you I have a stick of dynamite up my ass."

edit: this doesn't read as humorous as I intended...no offense

 

I'm not sure, but I think they would stay in business on the pervert/underloved demographic alone. :grin:

 

I didn't say it did.

The fact you could not infer that legality of the security measures was assumed kinda shocks me.

What we'll probably end up getting down to is the fact that I don't agree with the laws in place that govern private businesses as it concerns privacy, and that's a discussion for a different time.

 

Not really. I just haven't seen anybody show how this is a waste of time, money, and ineffective. Show me how it is and I'll gladly jump off the wagon (if I already haven't). Don't get snippy with me, rhad. DarthMost hasn't had his coffee yet.

 

Mandatory (TSA) vs. Voluntary (Macy's). There's a difference. Or at least, there should be.

Spoiler

This message brought to you by Ball-Fondlers of America

 

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.

What is the difference. My question is could a department store enact the same mandatory policies of the TSA to protect their customers safety as well as the property inside the store? Could a school, in light of the school shootings in recent years, enact the policy enacted by the TSA and require all students to go through this XRAY machine that stores images or be subject to the enhanced pat down procedures in order to enter class?

 

In the vast majority of cases this is probably true, but it doesn't lessen the invasive nature of it.

 

My point is that to fly you have to get your nards loved and your body scanned. Anywhere.

If you want to go to a department store, the government isn't running it, so your money isn't funding the privacy invasion, and you have a choice on where to shop.

If you don't want some clerk touching your ball-bag, then go somewhere else. Eh? Can't really do that with airlines. And unfortunately we haven't invented a mode of transportation that can do what airlines can yet, so you don't even have an alternative to that, either.

Government institution =! private institution.

I'm all for letting Macy's enact a wiener scanning and boob groping policy and watching them failboat their way to bankruptcy.

 

I'm not asking whether it would be good business practice. My question to you is would they be allowed to enforce that practice even if they wanted to. That's why we should jump to the schools.

If the State of Texas passed similar laws regarding the public schools in this state would we be OK with it? Would it pass a legal challenge?

 

Whether or not it will pass legal challenge is irrelevant to me, my question is, should it? My answer, for private institutions, is yes. My answer, for public institutions, is no.

I have a problem with equating something mandatory (public) to something voluntary (private) and applying laws equally to both of them, imo they should be treated differently. So that is why I don't see the point of bringing up schools.

My assumption was that these machines were 1) not r****dedly expensive 2) effective and 3) efficient. Turns out they're NONE of that. So, keep them out of the public (mandatory) arena.

 

I'm torn on this. I probably fly more than anyone on this board. I've always thought that these security measures were making me safe, but the more I read rhad's posts and explanations the more I'm starting to side with his viewpoint. I'm overseas now and living in Ukraine, but I've always made a mental note of how well airport security is handled in Germany. It seems really smooth, structured, organized and not so invasive like some of the TSA riff raff I've seen in the US. I need to think about this a little more but that's my initial thoughts after reading through this thread.

 

you should pretend you are gay (assuming you arent) and make the TSA guy as uncomfortable as possible by telling him how much he turns you on, how you love it when he touches you there - lots of "oh baby, thats what i like" and "you know how to make me feel sooooo good". think lots of sexy thoughts right before hand so you have a nice chubby going when he feels you up.

 

I think a few of you may be overestimating the sense of humour of airport security and customs agents

 

They should take all of the people who have an issue being patted down, and let them all fly together....designate certain flights as "no pat down flights" and all the civil rights a-holes can fly together along with any other joe schmo who doesnt feel like getting patted down.

Ill fly on the flights where they do their best to limit my risk of getting blown up

Have a nice flight

 

i think they do get off on it.

you have to be a real sick piece of crap to want to work at a job where you grope old women and little kids and look at images of naked people all day.

and i continue to be highly disturbed by some of yalls comments - again, you are the 'cattle' that paul was referring to.

 

i didnt find it funny when i refused to go through the body scanner at san fran airport a couple months ago and they felt me up (back of hand touched sack), swabbed my hands with a white pad for chemical explosives and then tore through my luggage - in the end they took my can of shaving cream - dont you feel so much more secure now?

 

u can drive or charter your own jet next time...if i saw u refuse the body scan, then yes, i would have felt more secure once they patted u down

 

=2 minutes in flight from what i heard on colbert last night or the night before

 

you are the cattle that ron paul was referring to. do you like watching women get groped and little kids get molested too?

 

and you need to find another way to travel if you dont like it....maybe Ron paul can come pick u up