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

again, if you dont see the difference b/t having your luggage scanned and having your naked body scanned and the image stored or being sexually molested by some glorified mall cop than i dont know what to say.

 

my mom got scanned in kansas city last month and they still patted her down after the scan. my brother just had to go through the metal detector.

my mom said it was all women and children in the scanner line and it was a fat guy operating the machine. thats what i noticed in san fran - they were even making little kids go through it.

 

i will be disrespectful towards those who are disrespectful towards me...sorry. the TSA are a bunch of punks who are not worthy of my respect in any way. i hate them all.

just one example, but there are lots...

 

yup thats what people dont realize its not just the scanner or the patdown.. it can be both if the TSA agent decides thats what he or she wants to do

 

Of course you don't see what the big deal. You've already admitted on this board you stalk teenage girls via their facebook page through your friend's account. You would get off to some dude touching your junk at the airport.

 

Do you live in a lead box?

 

For those who say, "Just take the body scan", let me know how you feel after your teenage sister's boobs show up on the internet.

http://gizmodo.com/5690749/these-are-the-first-100-leaked-body-scans

http://gizmodo.com/5604430/oops-the-feds-have-been-storing-nudie-checkpoint-scan-images

-----

http://gizmodo.com/5501485/airport-employee-abused-body-scanner-to-get-a-naughty-look-at-a-coworker

 

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TEeRD26hDDw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TEeRD26hDDw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

Great, u can stop whining about what you dont have to deal with anymore

 

searching someone is illegal?

u are the one who stopped flying because u are being patted won but IM the coward?

fantastic...so stop whining since u will no longer have to deal with the violation of your rights

 

not really....since 9-11, im for getting it right BEFORE they board the plane

 

In the muslim mosque thread, i came out against it due to potential sensitivity issues for those who lost loved ones...and argued that u could still put one up, but maybe 1/2 mile away

again, u keep complaining but u say u arent flying...so how about letting people who are actually going to fly deal with it? u have no more reason to whine

 

You don't make sense. You admit they're ineffective and wasteful, yet you don't have a problem with them.

As for privacy, we simply disagree. Fortunately, the constitution agrees with me and not you. Unfortunately, that may not be worth much in the end thanks to our gratuitously ineffective government.

^^^^This.


As for your argument ad absurdum that I must be against all searches or security to maintain some sort of consistent purview - nonsense.

Doing cursory searches that are cost and time effective is a rational thing to do. Excessive searches with no benefit that cost a great deal and provide for very easy abuse are not rational.

At the end of the day, your point of view is basically "so far I have not been inconvenienced by this equipment and procedure: therefore I have no issue with it, despite obvious and easily-proven ethical/rational issues." This is surprising, because even when you have posted some of your more outlandish rationalizations you at least generally show the ability to think critically and long-term (e.g. Obama's refusal to prosecute war criminals).

 

repped

 

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

your train boards in 3 minutes

 

Fortunately, there are people like you who wont fly anymore so i dont have to hear the whining

Unfortunately (for u), its not enuf of u to shut down the airline industry.

 

I dont need any of you people fighting for MY civil rights....they are MINE....if i want to travel by plane, Ill choose what to deal with or not to deal with....its that simple. Dont complain for ME just because YOU dont want people to see a scan of your body.

If you travel for business and that is what feeds your family, then I guess you will weigh whats more important to you. You can deal with the airport security or u can find a new job....or u can go home and tell ur hungry kids that "just as soon as the government changes their policy, u can eat...ok Johnny?"

If you travel for pleasure, then u can find other ways to get to your destination.

If you are one of those people who complain just to complain, like some on here, im sure there will something else that comes up that stokes ur fire within the next month

 

Sure, you could argue it. But you would fail for two simple reasons:

1) It's ineffective, the GAO already admitted that the scanners would not have detected the underwear bomber (Farouk Abdulmutallab) that started this whole mess, for example. Report after report verify that prohibited articles are still relatively easy to get on a plane.
2) It's theater - as I've said repeatedly there are numerous other ways to circumvent security. It's unreasonable to subject me to additional and degrading "security" for no conceivable benefit.

You need to re-read the quote from my previous post (and the constitution). The constitution outlines what the government can not do, not what the people are allowed to do. Your argument above is essentially meaningless. That being said, the verbage is cumbersome as written - as I said I did not write that, and I think I would have phrased it differently. However, the Locke-esque feel of the constitution is valid; it's important to remember that.

Read the 4th amendment.

 

Maybe u should read it....since you will have plenty of time on your 3 day bus ride from sea to shining sea

The wheels on the bus go 'round n 'round....'round n 'round....'round n round'...

 

Maybe you don't know what the 4th Amendment says NJ. It's OK, Sarah Palin probably doesn't either so you are in good company. Here it is for you:

I'm not expert but I think this here "amendment" or what have you seems to require something called "probable cause." LOL Whatever THAT is.