Editorial
Are Air Travelers Criminal Suspects?
The growing revolt against invasive TSA practices is encouraging to Americans who are fed up with federal government encroachment in their lives. In the case of air travelers, this encroachment is quite literally physical. But a deep-seated libertarian impulse still exists within the American people, and opposition to the new TSA full body scanner and groping searches is gathering momentum.
I introduced legislation last week that is based on a very simple principle: federal agents should be subject to the same laws as ordinary citizens. If you would face criminal prosecution or a lawsuit for groping someone, exposing them to unwelcome radiation, causing them emotional distress, or violating indecency laws, then TSA agents should similarly face sanctions for their actions.
This principle goes beyond TSA agents, however. As commentator Lew Rockwell recently noted, the bill "enshrines the key lesson of the freedom philosophy: the government is not above the moral law. If it is wrong for you and me, it is wrong for people in government suits. ... That is true of TSA crimes too." The revolt against TSA also serves as a refreshing reminder that we should not give in to government alarmism or be afraid to question government policies.
Certainly, those who choose to refuse the humiliating and potentially harmful new full body scanner machines may suffer delays, inconveniences, or worse. But I still believe peaceful resistance is the most effective tool against federal encroachment on our constitutional rights, which leads me to be supportive of any kind of "opt-out" or similar popular movements.
After all, what price can we place on our dignity, personal privacy, and physical integrity? We have a right not to be treated like criminals and searched by federal agents without some reasonable evidence of criminal activity. Are we now to accept that merely wishing to travel and board an aircraft give rise to reasonable suspicion of criminality?
Also, let's not forget that TSA was created in the aftermath of 9/11, when far too many Americans were clamoring for government protection from the specter of terrorism. Indeed it was congressional Republicans, the majority party in 2001, who must bear much of the blame for creating the Department of Homeland Security and TSA in the first place. Congressional Republicans also overwhelmingly supported the Patriot Act, which added to the atmosphere of hostility toward civil liberties in the name of state-provided "security."
But as we've seen with TSA, federal "security" has more to do with humiliation and control than making us safe. It has more to do with instilling a mindset of subservience, which is why laughable policies such as removing one's shoes continue to be enforced. What else could explain the shabby, degrading spectacle of a long line of normally upbeat Americans shuffling obediently through airport security in their stocking feet?
TSA may be merely symbolic of much bigger problems with the federal government, but it is an important symbol and we have a real chance to do something about it. We must seize this opportunity, before TSA offers some cosmetic compromise or the media spotlight fades. If you don't live in my congressional district, please consider contacting your member of Congress and asking him or her to cosponsor HR 6416, the American Traveler Dignity Act of 2010. With enough help, we can push the bill to a vote early next year. Unless grassroots Americans take action, federal agencies like TSA will continue to bully us and ignore our basic constitutional freedoms.
l Latest Daily Bell Articles
Feedback
 |
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 11/27/10 02:12 AM
"We usually find your posts quite insightful."
I'm flattered, however I assure you that I lack true insight in that I do not gain a consistently accurate understanding. My talent, if you can call it that, is pattern recognition, and the talent is not dependable nor is it always timely. As a result I'm prone to 'hunting' over the response surface before I lock up on a solution. It's nerve wracking for those close to me since I frequently do complete reversals of my opinion during times of high information flux.
One of the tricks is to avoid becoming too attached to a particular interpretation, since the situation constantly changes with new data and its painful on the ego if you bind yourself to a conclusion to closely and too early. Frankly, it drives my wife absolutely crazy.
But of course, you (all 1000 of you) knew this :)
 |
Posted by Zebillionaire on 11/25/10 05:41 AM
There is a method. It involves affirmation and also floating opposing approaches in order to solicit said affirmations. Cheap perhaps, but still a method.
I believe this war is over now. My father in law, a man of 80 plus years, explained that the TSA were only tasked with making us all "get in line". When a man of his age and wisdom arrives at that conclusion, I can feel comfortable with doing nothing, because the game is finished, the TSA has lost, the head is dead but the body doesn't know it.
Reply from The Daily Bell
"I can feel comfortable with doing nothing, because the game is finished, the TSA has lost, the head is dead but the body doesn't know it."
We usually find your posts quite insightful. And we tend to agree with your perceptions regarding the TSA. It is interesting the mainstream US press today is filled with articles proclaiming yesterday's TSA opt out was a failure.
What is being reported does not jibe with reality. Apparently, the TSA took the backscatter machines out of service and ceased the objectionable patdowns.
This is truly an act of desperation in our view as the alternative Net media is now in the process of revealing these latest manipulations. Surely the TSA should have known in the Internet that such gross manipulations would be reported on and analyzed. It is indeed as if they are out of bullets ...
|
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 11/25/10 04:37 AM
"And what would that be?"
@ The Bionic Bug :)
"Is your answer still the same?"
You guys just don't let up do you? It's sort of clear we have a disagreement concerning the correct way to go about "dealing" with this problem of the TSA. Perhaps I should include the author of the original in this reply as well. Please excuse the delay in reply, I am a chef and you have caught me during one of my peak demand performance moments. Now it's late, the turkeys have been put safely in the walk-in, the cranberry sauce is finished and the mushroom stuffing only waits for the morning. So let's talk?
First, you assert that my posts are contradictory. I may have a notion as to what you mean by that but it would be a waste of bandwidth for me to guess. What exactly do you feel is contradictory in my posts? Feel free to expound.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Perhaps the "bug" was reacting to your assertion regarding the TSA, that one does "nothing." Surely there is something one does, even if it is only to opt out - and to take human action to figure out different travel arrangements ...
|
Posted by Bewer on 11/24/10 01:23 PM
|
Posted by Puzzled on 11/24/10 07:20 AM
If you really want to help the American Public, you need to add to that bill.
1. If you are saying People on SS need to take a pay cut, start with Congress. I don't know anyone who makes $175,000. per year. Cut the pay soetoro put in place for CIA, etc workers to the level of private industry. Admin. Assist. $38,000 not $170,000.
2. Cut the $1,600. per term, retirement for congress people, most of our Congress people are now millionaires, due to holding office.
3. Stop all the "Extra" pay for being on Committee/Speaker of the House.
4.Shut down all the investigations, Outside of Washington, "Arizona Resorts, or any Resort".
5. Get Us out of the UN,IMF, & all the,other expenses we are now wasting our money on. Correction: Taxpayers Money!
6. Bring the armed forces home, we are in a proven UN-WINNABLE Situation.
These are just a few suggestions that would get us on the path to solvency. If soetoro would be impeached, thrown out of office.
|
Posted by Working Class on 11/24/10 03:30 AM
Obama is not a communist and he is not a Muslim. He is a Corporatist (Fascist) and a Christian. He is a unitary executive (dictator) in the mold of George W. Bush.
|
Posted by Bionic Mosquito on 11/24/10 12:09 AM
Is your answer still the same?
|
Posted by Zenbilionaire on 11/24/10 12:01 AM
"Is there a method behind your contradictory posts"
Yes.
Reply from The Daily Bell
And what would that be?
|
Posted by Bionic Mosquito on 11/23/10 11:36 PM
Is there a method behind your contradictory posts, or are you just forgetful from one minute to the next?
|
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 11/23/10 10:22 PM
"40,000 years of history says you're wrong on this one."
Are you interested in a bet? Wrong on what exactly? That human action won't solve this? What is your bet?
|
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 11/23/10 08:56 PM
"Especially if it further erodes our basic civil rights and freedoms and gives the government free reign to do anything it wants without penalty? Correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't that exactly what happened in 1939 in Germany?"
FIrst off, you have no "civil rights". What you have are expectations. You expect to be treated in a particular way. that isn't happening. The "law" says someone should fix that, but no one is. Oh BTW, you aren't wrong.
Your civil rights and $3.50 will get you a cup of coffee. Welcome to anarchy.That's pretty much what happens when any group has "free reign". You either pick up the reigns or you get stomped.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Welcome to anarchy.That's pretty much what happens when any group has "free reign".
40,000 years of history says you're wrong on this one.
|
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 11/23/10 08:37 PM
"You're also increasingly spouting nonsense."
Ha! Yes of course you're right, and I do admit I picked up the tone. Sorry but I can't let you guys have all the fun!
|
Posted by Gr8Dane on 11/23/10 08:25 PM
What no one seems to be addressing is the simple fact that since 9/11, we have endured airport screenings which have included metal detectors, puffers, hand wands and pat downs with dignity – all in the name of homeland security. Why is it that in almost a decade not one terrorist has boarded an airplane from the US? How is it that we now have to have a pornoscanner at the cost of (how many) millions to the taxpayer; and illegal sexual assaults on our person? I believe in the old adage of "if it ain't broke; don't fix it"! If everything we have had in place has worked well for the past decade – why do we need to change anything? Especially if it further erodes our basic civil rights and freedoms and gives the government free reign to do anything it wants without penalty? Correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't that exactly what happened in 1939 in Germany? Do we really want to just shrug our shoulders and say "I have nothing to hide" or "way things are now"? Seems as though it was that same mentality that led to what happened in 1939 and the stigma is still there if we allow it to be. Enough is enough – Dr Paul is right – make the government accountable for the laws they break or we will have nothing short of a tyranical rule whereby the populace becomes expendable at the whim of the government.
|
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 11/23/10 08:01 PM
"There is also longer range private flight available."
If you're thinking about going that route you should very definitely take a look at the price of aircraft these days. You can buy a nice twin engine plane for under $100,000 in today's market. I've been looking at a twin Comanche near me that's asking $90K. My friend says I'm stupid and should be looking at a Beach Duchess, so I'm taking her advice even though it has little chance of improving my IQ. The problem of course is the hangar, they aren't cheap. It's like a hole in the air you pour money in.
Or you could go with one of these "executive lease" programs. I looked at Delta's last month. You may as well just cut your wrists and save everyone else the trouble.
|
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 11/23/10 07:31 PM
"I think the more people who opt out this weekend, the better"
And you may well be right. Personally, I'm just writing my Congress critters, my Senators and also sending a few well placed messages to my favorite Airlines (the ones that I have those silly VIP cards with :).
You put your right foot in,
You put your right foot out;
You put your right foot in,
And you shake it all about.
You do the Hokey-Pokey,
And you turn yourself around.
That's what it's all about!
Click to view link
Reply from The Daily Bell
You're also increasingly spouting nonsense.
|
Posted by Myron Goodrum on 11/23/10 07:30 PM
I understand the pressures of business travel, and I hold out this. We can only do what we can do.
We do however live in the information age. Some business meetings can be handled through video conferencing. If there needs to be product sent ahead, this can be arranged ahead of the meeting. This would also save a company much time and money on travel expenses.
I like reading a lot about business, and most fascinating is at the time when there were no planes, few trains and no automobiles. A time when it took people, letter's and the news of the day, 3 to 6 months on average to reach their destiny. Usually this was by horse, ship, coach or whatever local rail, coach and ship combinations were available.
How is it that these business people were able to create great fortunes at a time of no air travel? Some of their dynasty's survive and thrive well today. Is there not a lesson in this?
Now I must stop here, I do not know the nature of your business. And not all businesses are capable of implementing complete virtual communication infrastructures. But that should be a goal in reducing a company's expenses. This is what the information age is all about.
I see many reasons and opportunities of why and how we could reduce or eliminate our need to 'frequently' fly for business. We just have to want to embrace them. Call it an information age paradigm shift.
Look, I don't see a no fly future, I just want to see a no TSA terror based one.
The easiest least painful way to wage war against this government encroachment is if we Boycott airports and airlines until the TSA air madness comes to an end. We will be better off for it. The more that don't fly, the better.
p.s There is also longer range private flight available.
|
Posted by Bionic Mosquito on 11/23/10 07:09 PM
I can accept a position of "do nothing." Doesn't cause me any harm, etc., etc. I have contemplated this for myself, I have decided it is not the choice for me.
Does the fact that Ron Paul is "doing something" automatically earn him the label of "dishonest"? Does it make him a fool? Or does it make those who support him fools? These comments were the reason I chose to reply.
I do not discount education so easily. I recognize those on the other side have far more resources. I am not deluded into thinking that we will some day live in a libertarian utopia. However, I have concluded that doing something (which I see as education) is more beneficial than doing nothing, and education is the "something" that offers the best opportunity for longer term success.
And I think the more people who opt out this weekend, the better. Anything to gum up the works, regardless of the imposition on the sheeple waiting in the que.
|
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 11/23/10 06:38 PM
"What do you propose instead?"
We don't know each other well but I get the feeling you're a pretty reasonable person from what you've written before. The answer is simple; nothing. We don't do anything at all.
Passing more laws is a waste of money, and even Dr. Paul makes a salary. There must be something better he can be doing with his time than passing one more useless statute.
Education is wonderful, and to the extent that he is educating the electorate he should be commended. I commend him. However the TSA are doing a much better job of educating the population than he can.
You could follow the tongue in cheek example I gave above and make life more difficult for the people paid to do the 'freedom searches', on a small scale it hurst no one, but if you turn it into a campaign you're going to seriously irritate the folks who just want to get through security and on to Grandma's house with the minimum amount of pain and suffering.
You won't make any friends standing on your Constitutional rights. Let's face it, for all the virtual b*tching I did in the short expose I did above, nobody got hurt, the TSA guys did what they were paid to do and all that came out of it was a funny story. Life went on. My dignity wasn't even bruised. Later on that same trip I had a *much* more interesting encounter with security in Puerto Rico but you'll need to actually buy me a drink before I'll tell you that one :)
So you don't do anything. This too will pass.
|
Posted by Jemlyn on 11/23/10 03:26 PM
DB: Could you add a little link so we could see the photo behind the page? Thanks.
 |
Posted by Shilo on 11/23/10 03:20 PM
The question would then be how to maximise security using a different methodology, and until there is a new and non-invasive screening technology, the authorities have no choice but to reduce potential threat by profiling people most likely to offer a risk.
I don't understand the resistance to this. The truth is we all do it all of the time. It's natural to spot a likely danger and take some appropriate action... and usually effective. Yes mistakes will be made....but fewer and fewer over time. You get good at what you practice.
|
|
