Friday, May 27, 2011

Texas House of Representatives Seeking to Ban Current TSA Pat-Down

***Update: 5/27/2011 – Read this story in the Houston Chronicle for an update.***

What's our take on the Texas House of Representatives voting to ban the current TSA pat-down? Well, the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article. VI. Clause 2) prevents states from regulating the federal government.

We wish we lived in a world where you could just walk on a plane with no security screening, but that just isn't the case unfortunately.  Aviation security agencies worldwide have been using pat-downs long before TSA was created to prevent dangerous items from getting onto airplanes. The pat-down is a highly effective tool to resolve certain alarms and keep these dangerous items off of planes that could cause catastrophic damage.  It's important to note that if a passenger (or bag) alarms during screening, our officers must resolve the alarm before allowing the passenger and their baggage on the airplane.

Here are some pat-down myths and facts:

Myth: Everyone who travels will receive a pat-down.

Fact: In fact, less than 3% of passengers receive pat-downs. Only passengers who alarm a walk through metal detector or AIT machine or opt out of the AIT receive a pat-down. In addition, some passengers may also receive a pat-down as part of our random, unpredictable security measures.  In his testimony to a Senate subcommittee, Administrator Pistole said: "The bottom line is few people in the overall scheme of things will actually receive those pat downs. Now, we've heard some examples, and obviously, there's a vocal group out there who have experienced this for the first time, and, rightfully so, raising concerns, what's behind this. And the bottom line is we, the transportation security officers in particular, are trying to work in partnership with the traveling public to say we want to ensure that you are safe on this flight. Work with us in a partnership to provide the best possible security. And that's what it comes down to."

Myth: All children will receive pat-downs.

Fact: No. TSA officers are trained to work with parents to ensure a respectful screening process for the entire family, while providing the best possible security for all travelers. Children 12 years old and under who require extra screening will receive a modified pat down. 

Myth: Complaints about the pat-downs are extremely high.

Fact: Only a small percentage of the traveling public receives a pat down as they travel through the security checkpoint.  Between November 2010 and March 2011, TSA screened nearly 252 million people. In that same time period, we received 898 complaints from individuals who have experienced or witnessed a pat down. That's roughly 0.0004%.

Myth: Pat downs for certain individuals are limited to the head and neck.

Fact: No one is exempt. Everyone is subject to the same screening. TSA is sensitive to religious and cultural needs, but everyone must be screened effectively.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team 

If you’d like to comment on an unrelated topic you can do so in our Off Topic Comments post. You can also view our blog post archives or search our blog to find a related topic to comment in. If you have a travel related issue or question that needs an immediate answer, you can contact a Customer Support Manager at the airport you traveled, or will be traveling through by using Talk to TSA.

1,032 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 1032   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Your interpretation of the Supremacy clause can be summed up as 'it's not a crime when the Federal government tells you to do it.'

Which is utter bunk.

Exactly what Federal LAW compels the TSA to grope breasts or sex organs?

Anonymous said...

I have a right to fly, but I know that when I exercise that right, I will be forced to give up a dozen other rights.

That explains why, I, with over 500k frequent flyer miles have not flown since the implementation of the TSA.

Anonymous said...

All of you unpatriotic, unamerican scum make me sick. In fact, I wish we would just abolish the Bill of Rights all together so I wouldn't have to hear you all whine. If you don't like the TSA, stay home. Simple as that. Don't leave your house. You think you have the right to go to the grocery store without a security clearance? Well you don't. That's just another wonderful privilege our benevolent Uncle Sam grants us, and we should all be grateful instead of criticizing. I'm sure the government is looking out for what's best for you and it's best not to question. You probably wouldn't understand anyway. And furthermore, our brave TSA agents are out there every day risking their lives to keep your genitals free of explosives. The least you could do is show a little respect. So I'll start: Thank you, the TSA. You truly make this nation great.

Kenema said...

Supremacy clause? What about Illegal search and seizure? You pick and choose what parts of the constitution you want to use, instead of using the entire document. Since the death of Bin Laden, we've had several incidents with passengers on aircraft. How many of these people were pulled aside for further examination? If the answer is "none", you're program is a total failure.

Anonymous said...

everything the obama bunch does is "in your face" and "we want to rub your noses in it"

Anonymous said...

I'm sure glad my flying days are long over. Why? My instinctive reaction to someone from TSA touching me would land me in court for assault and battery.
The only thing going on in the early 70's was hijacks to Cuba.
I was on a flight every other day in '72, '73 and '74. My territory was North America. Talk about jet lag!

Anonymous said...

I do not fly anymore because of the TSA. I will not accept that sort of treatment.

I drive everywhere.

Everyone should do the same till the standards come back into reason. The country will not enforce immigration laws allowing foriegners to break our laws, but the law abiding citizens with the funds to travel are treated as criminals.

Stop flying. It is okay to take a couple days to get somewhere. It is okay to fly less. You will be fine.

Anonymous said...

It's interesting that the link given only shows the first 7 Articles of the Constitution. Are they afraid to mention the last three -- on maybe the last one?

TSA is a bureaucracy gone wild. They have no oversight except by themselves, and find no wrong.

Anonymous said...

The TSA must be stopped now! Right now it is only in airports but will soon expand to Train stations, large public venues, highways, schools, malls, etc, etc, etc. If allowed to continue it will affect every aspect of our lives. The violation of our rights must be stopped now! Not to mention the FACT that these screening procedures have yielded absolutely NO results and cannot even detect obvious, real threats. Monkeys could, literally, do a better job!
We the people must stand up for our rights, or lose them!

Robert Humphries said...

Josh tells us that freedom of travel is a privilege (although he can't spell the word). He is wrong. Freedom of travel is one of the basic rights inherent simply because we exist. It is not a "privilege" granted to the "almighty ones" in the Federal Government.

Everything that the others are saying about the 4th Amendment is right on target. The TSA has no business conducting unwarranted searches.
One "Atta Boy" to the TX Legislators.
Robert Humphries
Sovereign Citizen of the State of Tennessee. www.tnliberty.org

Anonymous said...

The Supremacy Clause is a gross misinterpretation of the Constitution. The Constitution lists only 17 powers/areas delegated to the Federal Govt. The Tenth Amendment reaffirms this. The 4th amendment is being violated every time the TSA searches/scans someone getting on a plane without probable cause and without a search warrant.

Our patience is running out on these unAmerican acts.

Corporal of Marines

Anonymous said...

"Those willing to give up a little liberty for security, shall have neither." Every terrorist attack on a plane since 9/11 has been stopped by passengers and crew. There has not been one terrorist stopped by the TSA prior to boarding a plane! How many trillions will the TSA cost us, for nothing in return?

Anonymous said...

When you are doing wrong, it isn't refreshing to be arrogant about it. Profiling is one of the quickest ways to solve the current security problems. All of the problem people have fit the exact same profile.

Constant Air Traveler said...

Can the TSA explain how it is Constitutionally right for a stranger sitting in a room somewhere to get a look at my naked body...should I decide to opt out of the pat down? I don't believe seeing me naked should be a requirement for safe travel....and if you can make a "Constitutional" argument for it, you are delusional in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

It's already been pointed out, but your comparison on stats was dishonest. A more accurate representation would be as follows:

You claim less than 3% of passengers receive pat-downs. Granting you the upper end, this means based on your 252 million persons "served" you gave pat-downs to 7560000 people.

So, rather than roughly 0.0004%, it's closer to 0.01%.

This excludes the fact that your number is likely improbable. You've set up a culture wherein people are afraid to complain due to reprisals from your organization. Additionally, given the TSA's record with paperwork (re: when your own people couldn't fill out the papers for the scanners properly), it's a bit hard to take your numbers at face value.

In reality, you've upset a lot of people, caused a lot of complaints, and wasted a lot of money, for very little effect whatsoever.

That's not to say the job you do isn't hard, nor that it isn't done with the best of intentions, but when you trot out things like the supremacy clause and lying with numbers, you do a disservice to your organization, and to the American public.

Anonymous said...

"...Between November 2010 and March 2011, TSA screened nearly 252 million people. In that same time period, we received 898 complaints from individuals who have experienced or witnessed a pat down. That's roughly 0.0004%."

Nice try. The "enhanced pat-down procedures" and mandatory pat-downs for those who decline to pass through the naked body scanners only went into effect recently, yet when compiling your misleading statistic you draw from all who were screened over the past 9 1/2 years. I am sure the percentage of complaints is much higher since the new protocols were implemented and as the number of people who are outraged over this continued encroachment upon our civil liberties continues to grow.

Anonymous said...

Clearly, you have falsely interpreted the supremacy clause. The "notwithstanding" at the end means "if it does not contradict other parts of the constitution or state laws." Otherwise, the feds can't write a law that would violate the bill of rights or the laws of your state!!!

Anonymous said...

TSA is part of the law enforcement arm of the Executive Branch. Police and sheriffs and highway patrols are also. Ostensibly, the proposed Texas law would restrict ALL law enforcement, not just TSA.

In any case, the State of Texas may not and cannot stop federal agents from doing the job that Congress has mandated. If, in Arizona, immigration is a federal problem, then so is airport and airline security, and Texas is in no position to tell TSA how to do the job.

If people want relaxed security at the airport, they agree with the terrorists who want security relaxed, too.

By the way, there is no constitutional question of unreasonable search and seizure where there is consent to the search. Whenever you walk through the mag onto the checkpoint, you consent to a search. It's called "implied consent." You have plenty of opportunity to know this, what with all the signage and news reports. You may refuse to go through security; but, then, you don't fly.

Anonymous said...

if you have nothing to hide - why do comments have to be approved? TO HIDE ALL THE COMPLAINTS YOU PRETEND DON'T EXIST (TYRANTS SHADY AGENCY)

Afraid said...

There are some great comments here. From a quick count, it appears to me that about 90% are against the TSA and about 10% are speaking out in their defense. This is probably a far more accurate representation of the public's acceptance of "pat downs" than is Bob's 3% complaints (which is clearly a warped version of the facts ... it sounds like it is closer to 10% complaints from among those who must suffer through pat downs - but even if it is 3%, that is an abysmal rate for people feel threatened to make a compliaint and/or people who risk missing their flight if they complain).

Afraid said...

And for those of you who say "it's not our right to travel" - it's also not your right to force the rest of us to get molested. If you're afraid of traveling without the "safety" of first having someone fondle your privates - then YOU choose an alternate means of transportation. Stop thinking you can force me to watch my family viewed nude or fondled at gunpoint so you can have a false sense of security. If you like these things, please consider moving to another country where this is considered "normal" - we don't need you here.

Anonymous said...

Way to go, Texas. Somebody has to tell the Fed where to get off and to keep their hands off our junk.

Anonymous said...

Chalk up another complaint. If you think people aren't complaining, its because they think it won't do any good. You can bet a lot more don't like it.

Hey, TSA, why don't you go read the 4th and 10th Amendment before you start spouting off about the Constitution.

"this is a moderated blog ..." which means you will delete enough negative comments to make it seem the public agrees with you.

Anonymous said...

You know what the police say,
"You might beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride."

Afraid said...

One thing I will say in the defense of the TSA: This blog requires approval before comments are published - and someone at the TSA has been approving a very large volume of very negative commentary.

Kudos to the TSA for not subduing all negative comments.

I just posted several very negative posts sharing some the negative sides of the TSA (okay, so the ONLY positive side is that they allow at least SOME negative comments). Let's see if any of those other postings make it through their filters.

Cleary said...

So right now, the TSA limits this intrusion of the 4th Amendment to airplanes. But what about other modes of transportation? What if the Obama "patriots" (LMAO) say, "Well, it's just not good enough. We need to frisk people on trains, too. Add boats and ships to that. Hmm. We also need to make sure no one rents a taxi without being screened. And those sporting events - wow what targets - yep - put up the screening there too. And grocery stores - wow - what soft targets those are. We can put a slew of unemployed people (preferably the perverts) to work at grocery stores and malls and knock down the unemployment rate. After all, just living in the United States is a privilege. And as it is said, if you access a privilege, you waive your Constitutional rights. Have a nice day."

bruce said...

Texas has it right. TSA is a massive waste of resources and an invasion of personal freedoms of the ordinary citizen.

Bob said...

Lemme reiterate:

There is no constitutional issue here since ALL who go through the mag give what the law calls "implied consent" simply by entering the checkpoint. There are volumes of news reports that you are subject to search. There is ample signage just before you enter. Everybody knows beforehand. Everybody may refuse and go the other way; but, if you wanna fly and you go through the mag and it alarms, TSA MUST reconcile that alarm. That's the law, and THAT law outweighs any state law.

Michael McConnell said...

Our family has decided to quit flying commercial airlines---period. We are currently looking at purchasing a motorhome so that we can bypass the indignities of being groped by strangers.

Anonymous said...

The TSA has a very poor track record of actually finding "bad guys". Why should the public submit to body scans and pat-downs when they do not seem to work?

Mark Peterson said...

The TSA did such an effective job in the last two weeks or so with the various men trying to open doors on airplanes and get into cockpits. The only effective security is a citzenery that acts in its own self-defense. Most security at airport is a waste of time and is now geared toward making sure that the soon to be unionized workers at the TSA get their lunch and breaks on time.

Anonymous said...

The TSA patdowns are not a Federal law of the land but rather a regulation issued from a bureaucrat. TSA agents are Federal Employees that do not have immunity from the laws of the states they occupy. If a TSA agent committed a murder or a robbery then they would be prosecuted by the State in which the crime was committed. Until the US congress passes a law granting express blanket immunity for TSA agents to commit sexual assault and child molestation on private property then TSA agents are not immune to the prosecution of any state law.

Anonymous said...

I am a US citizen, a former member of our armed forces (not a veteran, I didn't fight overseas), and someone without a criminal record. I travel frequently for business, both domestically and internationally.

I cannot stand the new security processes. They are ineffective and insulting. They are NOTHING like other countries, e.g., Israel. The Israelis treat me with more courtesy than the TSA, and I find the TSA pat-down to be humiliating and embarrassing. Of course, it was designed to be so. Why? So most Americans would opt-in to the scanners. That's right; make the pat-down so unpleasant that people will go into the scanners voluntarily.

I don't have a problem with scanners per se... IF someone has set off a metal detector or otherwise provided probable cause. For the rest of us, run us through the old scanners and be done with it. Oh, and add in some profiling. The Yemini who tried (unsuccessfully) to enter the cockpit a week or so ago was not given an extra search, and if anyone on that plane was going to be a problem it was a young Yemini traveling without luggage, cash, who paid for his ticket with cash, etc. Big red flags here that TSA missed, because they were too busy giving kids and old ladies and Al Gore patdowns.

All Americans are in favor of security. What we're not in favor of is security theater, and the violation of our constitutional rights without due process. I will gladly join in a class action suit.

Anonymous said...

Since you want to invoke the supremacy clause, I'll invoke another clause for you, Blogger Bobby:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

That's also in the constitution, the 10th amendment.

In fact, the Supreme Court has ruled that the police have no requirement in the constitution to stop any crime in progress, only to investigate and close later. That's right -- a police officer does not have to stop someone from killing you, he can watch it happen just as long as he investigates it later.

As a result, short of some liberal over-reaching in the constitution by an activist judge, you don't have a right to exist as an agency.

Anonymous said...

You can maneuver and manipulate facts faster than we can comprehend and effectively respond; you can construct bureaucratic firewalls too thick for us to hammer through....but you still can't tell us what to think, TSA.

And, eventually, THAT is what's going to take you down.

You've been deceived into willingly defending the indefensible. And of course, that's the problem with deception: 1) the deceived is always the last to know; 2) deceivers will always find a group who are willing to be deceived; and, 3) those willing to be deceived will always be willing to be found. The deception onslaught has been effective, I'll grant you that....too many normal Americans can't be bothered to THINK.

My name is Sharon Torgerson. H/T to CJ Grisham for reminding me to stand in place...I don't understand what the URL thing does or means...so am using "anonymous" as the posting mechanism.

Anonymous said...

The Supremacy clause is weakened daily by California. California has set a precedent by ignoring the Federal Goverment ban on marijuana.

Our judicial system works on precedent set, and California has set a large one. By not enforcing the law in California, the Federal Government is weakening our entire system for he whole country.

When laws are not enforced, anarchy begins.

Anonymous said...

What alarms do babies in diapers set off?

Better yet, please define for me how a pat down for no reason- or a body screening isn't an invasion of my privacy- specially when you are fondling me- and why this should not be considered an unreasonable search.

Bob said...

I used to be a Checkpoint Security Supervisor/Screener in charge/Screener pre-TSA. I didn't let complaints bother me; I had a legit job to do.

As an example:

One day, a captain and a first officer came through and alarmed the mag. I "wanded" them. Their hats alarmed. They wouldn't take off the hats so that I could reconcile the alarm. I told them to go out the exit and call their chief pilot and tell him why "you're not flying today and why your airplane is still sitting there." They came back with an airline supervisor who signed them through [that was illegal, btw].

Is THAT the kinda security you want? Cuz that's no security.

What will be the standard? Who gets the wave-through?

Tecnow said...

My gosh TSA, You amaze me with your utter stupidity. Maybe we should go pat your kids down, but do not worry, it will be a modified pat down ;)

Anonymous said...

I am disgusted by the TSA. I praise Texas for fighting the sexual abuse that Americans are being forced to submit to. Not only is the statement about the Constitution false, but you are not disputing the law itself but the right to pass the law. This tells me that you know that these "regulations" are wrong.

How about the fact that the "scanners" have missed stuff and the "pat-downs" have abused cancer patients? How about the fact that you tell children that the pat-downs are "a game"; which is what sexual predators tell their victims. Do you have a soul? Do you know guilt at all?

Lastly, when we are to the point that we have given up all rights for "safety reasons" we have already lost the war.

Anonymous said...

@joshD - Purchasing an airline ticket for interstate travel is a privilege? And you have the stones to call us idiots?

There just aren't words...

Tim Leary said...

MYTH:

Just because someone doesn't whine and complain means they aren't bothered by the body-scans and pat-downs.

FACT:

Many, if not all, of the people body-scanned and patted-down are bothered and feel intruded upon. However, because of TSA policies, passengers are afraid to say anything or look bothered for fear of being patted-down more or interrogated.

Ken Davidson said...

Here's another Myth/Fact to post on your website -

Myth: The TSA has been successful in stopping airline terrorist attacks in the past.

Fact: The TSA has foiled exactly 0 terror attempts on US airlines.

Curtis said...

And one more thing, the "Supremacy Clause" means that the Federal government has Supremacy in all matters that IT IS DELEGATED TO IT by Article 1, Section 8.

Now, show us where the Federal government is delegated the authority to molest passengers without any probable cause.

Hello? Anyone in there?

Anonymous said...

I will send this in the form of a formal complaint as well, but I thought I would also post it here for all.

I just came through IAH yesterday and was dumbfounded to see that the TSO's actually heightened the level of anxiety in all of the travelers. The way they were speaking to people and treating people was unprofessional to say the least.

It is already a stressful situation for many. What is needed is a cool and objective demeanor to set people at ease. This would make the whole process so much easier for ALL involved.

I actually felt LESS safe knowing these dullards were in charge. The could barely handle a crowd of everyday people just trying to get where they wanted to go. I honestly can't imagine what would happen if something serious went down.

I don't know exactly what the answer is, but I do know that the TSA as it exists today is a total farce. I'm not sure what your hiring process is, but you need to go back to the drawing board because what I saw yesterday was ineptitude personified.

Please get to work on this immediately.

Oh, and please add me to the list of complaints. I'll be number 900.

Dave Champion said...

The Supremacy Clause only applies if the Constitution first grants power to the federal govt to do a particular thing. Only a moron would imagine that the Founders intended the interstate commerce clause to permit the federal govt to fondle my genitals in the name of "security".

"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security” Ben Franklin

Anonymous said...

I read these blogs and I am dumbfounded at how many people think they have unrestricted rights to other's property. If you own the airport, the airline, all the businesses on the sterile side of the airport along with an insurance policy covering all the property you fly over, then by all means you can dictate your screening. In fact you can go be John Travolta and not even deal with TSA. But if you are claiming special rights because you purchased a $100 ticket to sit on somone else's airplane and have someone else fly you around, please don't fly next to me. You are dangerous to the rest of us.

It is even more laughable when those people try to assert the 4th Amendment on another's private property. Americans have lost all respect for private property. It is no wonder we are becoming a communist country right before our eyes.

To those fools objecting: "Get over yourself...you are not that important"

Anonymous said...

I have a serious question and it would be cool if you could answer it:

I'm one of those silly, rare americans who has left the country before, and I've flown back from several different airports in other countries. I have never been subjected to an x-ray scan or a patdown, or anything more than a metal detector. I was even permitted to board an airplane with a large bottle of shaving gel, which the TSA considers to be highly dangerous. My question is, couldn't a terrorist just fly in from a country with "looser" security, like the underwear bomber did? And since a terrorist would obviously avoid an airport with body scanners/etc, doesn't that mean that none of the people being harassed with patdowns and porno scanners are even potentially likely to be terrorists? Just out of curiosity, how many terrorists have been dumb enough to get caught like this? I don't follow the news much, but it seems like that would be a pretty big story.

Anonymous said...

TSA, you pat down little children, nuns, elderly ladies, people with urine bags that you cause to burst - BUT, how in the h*** did that Yemeni nutcase (May 9, '11) pass your scrupulous inspection to get on board and then when the plane was coming in for a landing he charged the cockpit while yelling allahu akbar! Did you not pat him down? Obviously he didn't raise any red flags to you, but little old ladies and 3-year old children do. Other passengers said he acted very strangely. How did you miss that?

TSA is a joke and an infringement of our Constitutional rights.

Anonymous said...

"We wish we lived in a world where you could just walk on a plane with no security screening"


Do you? Wouldn't you be out of a job if that were the case?

Anonymous said...

It is the right, and i say the duty, of all Americans to question and confront government policy. America is not the USSR. It's "We the People", not "We the Government".

Anonymous said...

Did you seriously trying to quote the Constitution? Are you sure you want to go that route? How 'bout 4th and 10th amendments?

Anonymous said...

"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal." R.M. Nixon

At least Nixon had been elected President by a far larger majority than Obama. Overwhelmingly larger. 97% of the electoral vote and 61% of the popular vote. But even Nixon couldn't continue to ride the popularity train after the people started discovering how corrupt and dictatorial his administration was.

Anonymous said...

I would like to see the manner in which complaints are logged and recorded. I have written to complain myself, via e-mail which was the only method I was offered when I asked. I was subjected to a pat-down. I would have opted not to fly if that wouldn't have left the rest of my family stranded in the terminal. I know two other people who have complained. I find it statistically improbable that we are three out of less than 900 compliants. I'm guessing that you are filtering the data to produce a result that sounds better.

PanhandleSlim said...

BloggerBob, you are misled regarding the Constitution. The 9th and 10th Amendments were included to make absolutely sure there was no misunderstanding about the limited powers the Constitution grants to the federal government.

Amendment IX:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The government has no power to tell people what to do EXCEPT in areas specifically authorized in the Constitution. This includes patting down genitalia, etc. The Constitution does not empower you to do that.

Anonymous said...

Are you all really so afraid of patdowns? Is it a fear of being be touched by a person of the same sex? Request the opposite sex then.

Anonymous said...

I noticed that my appropriate comment wasn't posted, nice censorship. Only TSA propaganda will be going on these posts. The TSA isn't going to win, the American citizens are.

Anonymous said...

What a joke. Because I can't be exposed to radiation from the scatter scanner because of a long history of skin cancer, you claim you have the right to fondle me? Forget it. Try patting down people who are suspicious. Leave the rest of us alone. You all are destroying the Constitution...don't try to use it as justification for your cowardly policies.

Anonymous said...

I'm all for safety, but the TSA screening process is ridiculous. I haven't gone through the imagers or pat downs yet, but if I am subjected to those invasive measures you can bet I will be complaining.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but the 4th and 10th Amendments trump your dear "Supremacy Clause." They "amended" the original Constitution, get it?

Anonymous said...

GO Texas!!!!! End the police state. Really patting down 6 yr old kids. you people are sick. Privatize the TSA now. GOV/THE PEOPLE cant afford them..

Anonymous said...

Why isn't the TSA monitoring any flights coming in from overseas???? That's where all of terrorists are from, Right?? The fact is that the TSA is directed at the American people. Time to wake up America.

Anonymous said...

NOTHING MAKES ME MORE SICK THAN THE TSA. They're lies and their sick actions.

Anonymous said...

"Few complaints"- nice propaganda. Great strategy to quiet people who have a problem with it- make them think they are in a minority.

If you are flying somewhere, you have a time constraint. How does "complaining" in line at security help the process? The TSA, in conjunction with the federal government, has created a process that prevents people from voicing their dissatisfaction. As an American citizen the idea that my rights, opinions and speech are inhibited are more frightening than the thought of a terrorist attack.

I fly frequently and 70% of the time I have to go through the AIT, receive unnecessary radiation and then 50% of the time following that, I get a pat-down. It's ridiculous. If you try to opt-out of the AIT they say it takes 20 min to find someone to do a pat-down; again, another way to force people to comply.

Flying to me is not a privilege; it's for work. Without travel I couuldn't do my job. Without a job I'd be dependent on the government.

TSA employees are not law enforcement and have no authority. They are disrespectful and treat American citizens like criminals. They are not health officials so should not be able to administer radiation.

When people don't speak out, the government creates policies that are against the constitution; we've been silent for too long. Way to go Texas!

Anonymous said...

We actually "Do" have the right to fly, who says? Oh just the SUPREME COURT.

http://supreme.justia.com/constitution/amendment-14/96-right-to-travel.html

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/11/17/do-you-have-a-right-to-fly/

Now enough of the propaganda and enough of this ridiculous TSA.

Scott said...

JoshD, you said we're all idiots because these searches are aviolation of the 4th Amendment.You said we don't have have a right to fly. Wrongo. We do have a right to fly as long as our taxes subsidize airports, airlines and perps. In every other facet of society, we have the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. And so it should be with the TSA.

Anonymous said...

The TSA is a disgrace. I have cut flying by half...but that is much as I can do. Follow the money...these full body scanners are ridiculous and this latest 'push' for their utilization is not about safety, rather it is about justification for making Michael Chertoff's company rich. Let's get those volumes up through the scanners and cut another check to Michael.

Anonymous said...

I'll try to keep this respectful. While I see where people come from worrying about "safety". However, the pat downs don't make us any safer. Terrorists can hide bombs in much less wholesome places. The only thing that could spot them then would be full medical xrays. This is security theater. I certainly don't hate the government for trying, but this is against search and seizure laws, and the right to move freely about the country as an individual without harassment. I believe that courts will try such cases over the next few years and declare these shenanigans unconstitutional, and also ineffective. TSA and FAA took good steps when they decided to let pilots lock the door and carry firearms, and stepping up the number of air marshals. These pat downs and surface body scanners aren't going to stop anything. Never again will someone let them hold a plane hostage using box cutters because we all know now what happens to everyone. Peace be with you all. Keep up the debate :) .

Steven said...

i heartily recommend that you TSA people actually take time to read the Supremacy Clause and thrn update this blog with an apology for making such an idiotic claim.

Johnny Zornes said...

Here is title VI section 2: "Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

This clause mentions nothing about whatever illegal regulations your agency may come up with to violate the 4th amendment. This clasue is for Laws (made by congress) and treaties (also made by congress)not for a rouge behaving agency. The Supreme Court has slapped the hands of many a "real" law enforcement agency for going too far.

Anonymous said...

Your "enhanced" patdown is the only reason I stopped flying. What is wrong with the metal detectors that you used for years? Oh I remember, you bought a bunch of x-ray machines that exposes our junk. Don't want to go through the x-ray machine? Well let's just grope you a bit to make you change your mind about that. TSA has gone from a public service organization to a totalitarian bureaucracy within a matter of two years time.

Anonymous said...

Inasmuch as the original states of America [the original federation or "Federal" government] created the "national" government [in Philadelphia if I recall correctly, before that gang moved to DC], the national government of which TSA is a part should show a good deal less arrogance and a whole lot more humility when dealing with the several states. Keep in mind also that all governments employ terrorism in order to coerce compliance and bully their intended victims into obedience. Keep in mind also that our taxes pay for the guns that our government points at us with ever-increasing frequency with each new law that they fasten upon our backs, and our taxes pay also for the prisons into which we are thrown, assuming that our government has not murdered us fist. In short, TSA can point to the supremacy clause while ignoring every other transgression by government against the principles embodied in our Constituion, while blowing smoke up our whizbangs. Comment censorship in a "government" website? Whoever heard of such a thing?

Osamas Pajamas

Anonymous said...

Jeez, no wonder the TSA Blogger uses a pseudonym. This article is as big a waste as the TSA itself.

Anonymous said...

Exactly why are we paying god knows how much to a government employee to write a blog anyhow?

Anonymous said...

The fact the authors felt the need to cook the statistics says all that needs to be said. If "less than 3%" of all passengers receive pat-downs, then the percentage complaint should have been calculated on the 7.56 million who received the pat-downs, not the 244,440,000 who didn't.

Anonymous said...

The Constitution also has a fourth amendmant which states, "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."

Pilot.Dave said...

The sad thing is WE pay some political science dude at TSA to write the dren and post it... Notice how their "Facts" are non-specific ? Its because they are lying to us...

Real FACT - TSA has yet to catch a SINGLE terrorist in nearly 10 years... and we pay $6 Billion a year for them to abuse us.

Blogger Bob said...

I just wanted to drop in and let you know that this is a moderated blog and it's the weekend. We may manage to moderate a few tonight, but I wanted to let you know we will be back in action tomorrow morning.

Thanks!

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Kevin Lacobie said...

The TSA is invoking the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution? How rich is that?! The Supremacy Clause is related to the supremacy of the Constitution itself and to Laws passed by the US Congress. Far as I know Congress hasn't passed a law permitting the TSA to sexually harass individuals, or even to specifically authorize invasive pat-downs. The TSA may implement regulations and procedures in accordance with enacting legislation, but it still must follow all applicable federal and state laws. So, #fail on you guys for trying to invoke the Constitution!!

Anonymous said...

As a Constitutional scholar and teacher I must respectfully disagree with you Constitutional interpretation.
You are correct about the States authority however you are completely wrong about your authority to do invasive searches of a persons body without a warrant from a judge.Unless of course there is a DECLARED war.So while you have the BRUTE FORCE to invade a person's body you do NOT have the Constitutional authority. History will so demonstrate.
Prof. Mac

Anonymous said...

In a nutshell, this is the problem: "Only passengers who alarm a walk through metal detector or AIT machine or opt out of the AIT receive a pat-down." The issue is at airports where people are directed to the AIT instead of their option to go through the metal detectors. I fly every single week, I opt for the metal detector line, and at Reagan airport they make nearly everyone go through the AIT. Since I have no desire to be exposed to radiation on a weekly basis, nor provide an imagine more invasive than what my doctor sees on a regular checkup, I always end up with the pat down. I didn't opt out, I was sent to a line I didn't opt for.

If the AITs were restricted as secondary screening, with viable cause, people would be far less upset and far more cooperative. Of course, if the TSA was actually effective in their jobs they might find even more cooperation but most of their work is simple "feel good" measures for the masses and not for the individual being groped. I learned the hard way never to wear a dress on a flying day, and the public is no safer for it.

Anonymous said...

After reading this arrogant and disrespectful TSA blog entry, I am actually angry. Previously I was simply annoyed by it all. WHAT ABOUT THE 4th AMENDMENT? People are being searched on public property who are not suspected of any crime.

Anonymous said...

noticed its moderated you won't post messages from earlier today that show TSA are a bunch of fools

Anonymous said...

I want to just say that this stupid post, which I fully read, doesn't speak to any of my concerns at all. Judging from the many videos I have seen of babies, children, and old ladies getting patted down it is clear this system is a total failure despite claims to the contrary by the TSA.

And hearing "Blogger Bob" trot out these lame excuses and put up a straw man argument about this being needed to protect us from catastrophe just makes me even more unhappy about this whole problem. It's repulsive, demeaning, hyper-intrusive pat-downs OR DEATH!!!!

This is another step down the path of a country none of us want to have our children grow up in.

The TSA agents doing the "patting", the policy-makers making the rules, and the "bloggers" here defending it are just more benign versions of the guards in Milgram's experiment. "Just following orders for your protection, now comply or else!"

Congratulations on your evolution from carefree children in a carefree world to pathetic aparatchiks patting down infants and making grown women cry by touching their vaginas in the name of protecting us from infant terrorists.

Mike said...

Wow. I have to take a shower after wading through that pile of bull. I think the TSA lost whatever credibility it MAY have had when Drudge posted pics of (1) that toddler getting groped and (2) the agents checking out a baby's diaper. Come one TSA blogger person, don't you know when you've lost the PR war?? Incidentally, Janet Napolitano doesn't help you case any...you'd be better off keeping her away from a camera and mic.

Anonymous said...

Ones rights are not violated when they give their consent. If you don't want to be searched then don't step in line.

For the same reason, a doctor performing a physical exam is not violatig your rights since you consented to the exam.

Anonymous said...

Look guys I can cite the constitution too!

4th Amendment:

"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."

Richard_Iowa said...

Right now the TSA is desperately wanting to unionize so they can get those $129,000 + benefits entry level salaries. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is, of course, in favor of this. In the meantime, defending the touching of genitals, breasts, and feeling up children is necessary to maintain their relevance. BTW - how much contraband has been found on the Catholic nuns, old women in wheel chairs, and very young children that have been felt up? No profiling, though.

Anonymous said...

1. TSA people in following airports have acted in an offensive manner when I have been present LAX, ORD, LGA, SFO, SEA, DEN.
2. The TSA, so far, has caught ZERO (0) terrorists and added to the cost and difficulty of air travel.
3. The TSA does not follow the advice of the Israeli's and target interview...a much better system.
4. 36,000 people have been murdered on the USA Mexico border in five years....DHS (TSA) has done Nothing To Stop the Murders. While mass graves are being discovered on the border, the TSA is patting down granny and infants "in order to assure our safety"....ridiculous.
But all that aside, I did what many do today...I quit traveling by air unless absolutely necessary...I use electronic conferencing or I drive or take a train when travel is necessary.

The TSA has just become one new gigantic overfunded underperforming government entity.

Anonymous said...

The unconstitutional actions of a government that tells others to abide by the rule of law, while having NO respect for the same is why I simply will never fly again. I have no wish to get on an airplane at the cost of my liberty.

Anonymous said...

The government does not necessarily need a warrant to conduct a search - there is an exception for administrative searches.

Also, air travel falls within the interstate commerce clause, which means the government may regulate it - even if the flight is completely intrastate (aggregate, substantial impact on ICC).

The supremacy clause therefore would apply, any state law that contradicts federal law (or interferes with a federal goal) is by default null and void, and the federal law is supreme.

So, you armchair lawyers should probably do a little basic research before posting.

Anonymous said...

I just wanted to drop in and let you know that this is a moderated blog and it's the weekend. We may manage to moderate a few tonight, but I wanted to let you know we will be back in action tomorrow morning.

Thanks!

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
-------------------------

Translation:

All dissension will be dealt with tomorrow.

-------------------------

Seriously, why even post that?

AMWAZ said...

I am flying with my husband and two small children in July for a family visit. I am trying to prepare myself for my reaction if you happen to pull me aside for a patdown or a run through the porno scanner. It's wrong, it's an abuse of power, but I think I can handle it. My husband may not be able to. And he's an angry guy with a short fuse. The thing that scares me most is wondering how I will react if you pull aside my three-year old girl. Because if you scare her, touch her, or do anything to add to the stress of traveling with small kids, I think I will lose it. So much for looking forward to a family vacation - I'm dreading it because of the TSA. The terrorists have indeed won - they've caused our own government to turn against it's citizens. If a terrorist attacks me, I know the government will step in for justice and prosecute the case. But if the TSA assaults me? We're on our own.

tta2 said...

Well, let's see. Article 6, Clause 2 says the Constitution, and any laws made in pursuance thereof are the supreme law of the land. NOWHERE N THE CONSTITUTION ARE YOU GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO DO WHAT YOU DO. That means that the laws you operate under were not made in pursuance thereof, and therefore are not the supreme law of the land. Sheesh. It's not rocket science.

Kevin Sawyer said...

"I just wanted to drop in and let you know that this is a moderated blog and it's the weekend. We may manage to moderate a few tonight, but I wanted to let you know we will be back in action tomorrow morning. "

That's a splendid use of our tax dollars.

If you are going to evoke the Supremacy Clause, you are making a powerful case that the TSA should not be run by the federal government.

Anonymous said...

It is so comforting we have a constitutional legal expert blogging for the tsa! Wow - very impressive. This really bolsters the credibility of the blatant propaganda oozing from every cavity of this website.

Anonymous said...

Unbelievably, I stand here admiring Texas, and wondering why all other states aren't doing the same.

Exador said...

I, like many other people, choose to 'Go Galt'. I will not fly so long as these procedures are in place. Let the airline industry go broke.

Anonymous said...

Myth: Any of this really keeps us any safer.

Anonymous said...

The States CREATED the Federal Government and can dissolve it at their discretion.

Bob doesn't get it. And speaking of "Bob", he's probably a whole customer service rep team who just spews the same tired Barack Obama approved policies through the posting. Probably failed GS-5 flunkies who are ticked off at the GS-7s or GS-9s who are "unfairly" making more money then them. Supervised by a GS-11 who is more adept at keeping his 11 rating by snowing his superiors and working effectively 20 hours a week, spending 20 on the Internet surfing.

Most of the "commenters" are actually TSA agents who are out here defending their Emperor out of misguided loyalty...you can pick them out....those who "defend" the actions their fellow abusers....

My original point...."Bob" doesn't get it is that the STATES can overrule the Federal authorities. And if that doesn't work, there's always secession.

Anonymous said...

"Article VI: Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

This states that that the State or Local governments cannot usurp the powers of the Federal government when the Federal government is enforcing the Constitution, as stated here "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof."

The laws must be made pursuant to the Constitution, they must support the Constitution and abide by it's limits on the Federal government's power.

Explain how exactly the T.S.A. is operating pursuant to the Constitution, please, because as I read it you shouldn't even exist. None of your "laws" or "regulations" are specifically guaranteed to the federal government in the Constitution, therefore we can tell you no on anything the State or Local governments please because of this,
"Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States (Federal Government) by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (Comments in parentheses added by me for clarity)

This states that if the states so choose, they can prohibit you from exercising certain powers. This is exactly what is happening in Texas right now, with the bill that has passed that allows charges to be brought against any T.S.A. employee that inappropriately touches a citizen.

As I said, please explain further. Obviously you're using some other logic.
We have EVERY right to tell you no.

Anonymous said...

"Fact: Only a small percentage of the traveling public receives a pat down as they travel through the security checkpoint. Between November 2010 and March 2011, TSA screened nearly 252 million people. In that same time period, we received 898 complaints from individuals who have experienced or witnessed a pat down. That's roughly 0.0004%."

I see that you took your lessons in spinning statistics to heart. Please note your 0.0004% refers to "patdown complaints vs. total screened". I'd be more interested in seeing the "patdown complaints vs. total patdowns" percentage. Or perhaps tell us what the total number of people who "experienced or witnessed a pat down" and let us do the math on our own. I guarantee you it will dwarf your 0.0004%.

Throw in that your number of complaints refers only to the number of complaints formally filed with the TSA. However, I agree that this is the only "official" number you have to go by, but you should know better than to tout it as evidence.

Also, 252 million = 252,000,000.

898 / 252,000,000 = 0.000004%

So, your math is off. The only way to make your math correct is to either decrease the total number screened, or increase the number of complaints. So which is it:

89,800 complaints or 2,520,000 total screened?

Granted, your answer doesn't matter much, especially since you will simply say "Oops, our math was off, but since 0.000004% looks even better, that's the right one". As I said above, until you provide us with the percentage of complaints vs. the percentage of people that witnessed/experienced a patdown, your numbers mean nothing.

SouthlakeTexasCritique said...

“war on terror” (TSA)
is a cover for power-hungry, Big Government zealots to trample constitutional government and squash freedoms and liberties, which are supposed to be protected by the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence; not to mention 8 billion price tag to have the agents sit around waiting for 'customers'!

Joe said...

The TSA operations are an embarssement to this country and all employees should feel ashamed for what they are doing.

It is extremely ironic that they are using the supremacy clause to defend their personal and unwarrented searches on American citizens.

Just like every other part of life, these powers over other people will lead to corruption and abuse (especially when most employees are uneducated).

If you work for the TSA, stand up for our country. Your job is just a small part of a much larger (maybe unintentional) effort to slowly take our civil liberties. Quit your job, tell your bosses why, and help save our country.

Jeff, San Diego said...

While I agree that states can't regulate the Federal Government, the TSA is the most ineffective, liberty robbing, agency conceived. Not only has the TSA never stopped or deterred any potential plot, I have read that the TSA regularly fails to catch test runs. I applaud Texas' efforts. The TSA is waste of taxpayer money. Raise complaints to 900.

Anonymous said...

Add me to the complaint count - I opted out of the xray machine - the posted sample was way too explicit! They yelled 2 times for someone to pat me down - probably an effort to embarrass me. I don't embarrass easily and I had already decided we were doing this right in the hallway. At least they had the decency to have a woman since I am female. The TSA agent was rude and surly from the beginning - it was obvious she felt I had inconvenienced her. And since I had to remove my belt, she darned near pulled my jeans down twice. When I complained and held them up she gave me several ugly glares. Unfortunately I can't formally complain since my beloved country will hold it against me. We used to fly several times a year but not any more.

Anonymous said...

Americans do have a right to fly. US Federal Code states as much.
"A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace."

US Code - Section 40103: Sovereignty and use of airspace

Anonymous said...

I would happily approve of the TSA patting down all the illegal border crossers in the name of security.

Sam said...

If it wasn't for that pesky 4th amendment, you're argument might actually matter. The sad state of things is that right now the TSA unlawfully searches citizens merely because they've chosen to fly on an airplane. There's no probable cause other than that. As a member of the US military, I lower my head in utter shame when I am forced to fly.

The TSA is a mockery of actual law enforcement, a reactive security measure AT BEST, and at worst, just another step of government intrusion into our lives.

Good on Texas for taking a stand. Shame on the Federal gov. for letting it come to this, and shame on TSA and Homeland Security for treating everyone like criminals.

And one more thing, why the hell does the TSA have a blog? I wouldn't have read this unless I followed a news story. Why is this needed? Stupid government...

Anonymous said...

Any pat down is an illegal search.

Unless you've got a warrant with specific identifying information or reasonable suspicion, the patdown - or any sort of search, whether manual or electronic - is illegal as it violates the Fourth Amendment.

As the Fourth says; "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."

How does a random pat down describe the place and person to be searched and the things to be seized?

Sorry, TSA, you are on the wrong side of the Constitution on this one. Unfortunately, We, the People, are too numbed to resist or to ensure the rules are followed.

Anonymous said...

dumb.... the great thing about the constitution is it hates entities like the tsa. hiding behind this clause disregards the entire document's purpose to minimize the national government. dont be dumb..

ready for the quote i got from the t.s.a. in vegas???

"hi my name is jeff, and i will be touching your sensitive areas."

Anonymous said...

BB said: I just wanted to drop in and let you know that this is a moderated blog and it's the weekend. We may manage to moderate a few tonight, but I wanted to let you know we will be back in action tomorrow morning.///

///

Perhaps it'd be a good start if ALL of the TSA took the weekends off.

Ayn R. Key said...

Your use of the supremacy clause was expected BUT ... it says that the constitution and laws derived from it are the supreme law of the land. There is nothing in the constitution that authorizes the activities that Texas is banning.

Of course you've been asked to show the constitutionality of your activities before, and you've ignored that request before.

Anonymous said...

So, the TSA thinks it can trump Texas with a severely misinterpreted reliance on the Supremacy Clause does it?

Then why hasn't it? A majority of the several states has refused to permit REAL ID. DHS/TSA was going to require it in 2007, then 2008, then 2010, now 2011, yet, last time I flew, my ordinary and well worn non-REAL ID was accepted by the TSA.

That was the first shot. Texas is now taking careful aim as is Alaska. Hopefully the remainder of the States will step in as well.

Texas Rangers, GO git 'em.
TSA: Don't mess with Texas!

Anonymous said...

Go Texas! Arizona supports you! TSA you are one big government bureaucracy that needs to go away. I dread the day you were created!

Anonymous said...

JoshD said, "You people are idiots. it is not a vio0lation of your 4th amendment right at all. Last I checked it isn't your right to fly, it's a privelage."

Fine, deny someone the privilege of flying. But, the pat down IS a violation of our rights.

Further, I was unaware that the airlines were federally owned corporations. So, the AIRLINES are forcing the security? So, then, refusing the pat down isn't a violation of law. So, any forcible restraint due to refusal to be patted down - say, involuntarily put into a secure room - would be kidnapping.

The TSA is there because the federal government put them there, not because the industry asked for them.

Besides, bin Laden's dead, so terrorism is over.

Robert said...

If you're gonna say the supremacy clause to say Texas law doesn't apply to you then you should flip the page over the and check out the admendment between numbers 3 and 5. Also, complaints being low may have something to do with fear or reprisals. You know, the guidelines you're using that came out the other week that says complainers will be flagged for closer inspection. Or it could have something to do with the glass cages you have off to the sides you put complainers into. Or it could be if you refuse you're threatened with jail for obstruction.

mr stewart said...

The TSA itself is unconstitutional. The Supremacy Clause applies to the 17 enumerated powers of the federal government. If it's not listed in these powers, it's unconstitutional, as indicated by the 9th and 10th Amendments and as clearly explained by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and other founders. To end the terrorist threat, the federal government should end all wars and military occupations in the Middle East and turn over airport security to the airlines, which, unlike the government, have a strong incentive to keep passengers safe, lest they go out of business.

Anonymous said...

Wondering why the TSA needs a blog site to get out it's version of the TRUTH! Or is it possible to due to all of the Bad PR that the government is once again trying to fool all of the people. Besides just how much does "TSA Blogger Bob" make doing this little govenment job?

joe said...

The guy who wrote this is arguing the constitution wont allow for individual states to regulate the feds (TSA),well were in the constitution does it allow for unreasonable or warrant less searches or having untrained agents molesting children. The TSA should be abolished

Anonymous said...

How many post does Blogger Bob delete on a daily basis???

tngilmer said...

Texas is not regulating the Fed Government, Bob, but the conduct of individuals which is legal under the Constitution.

Anonymous said...

And For those anonymous folks out there complaining loudly about this, me included. Just remember, The TSA IS moderating this site. That being the case, watch your mouths, and hold your tongues because they CAN and WILL get IP addresses and take you to jail if you threaten them. They might just take all of us to jail anyway just to prove how big and bad they are.

Anonymous said...

To the intellectually challenged lapdog above who said "And we know that X-rays are 100% safe because they are used in hospitals everyday by doctors."...

As a physician, I'll have to disagree - they are not. Xrays cause cellular damage which can lead to cancer. The devices used for screening do have a smaller amount of total ionizing radiation but... it is all concentrated on the skin, leading to a greater risk than their first analyses suggested. Go google it yourself. And step away from the kool-aid.

Anonymous said...

The Federal govt wil use the Constitional question ONLY when it suits their purpose, otherwise they disregard it

Anonymous said...

Since when is flying a "privilege"? The gov doesn't own the airlines, people (investors) do. The gov has yet to catch a single terrorist, even the shoe bomber or underwear bomber via screening. Plus their own checks show 40% of contraband getting thru screening. Great job. Lol.

Mike said...

The supremacy clause of Article VI clause 2 follows what is essentially a federalism clause which says that the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof are the supreme law of the land. If those federal laws are not in pursuance thereof, then the supremacy clause does not apply to the states.

Josephus T Plumber said...

When I read of the Texas House of Representatives bill yesterday, the first thing that came to mind was the idea that Texas is attempting to overrule the federal government. The second thing that occurred to me is that the bill is some more demagoguery from politicians to divert attention away from the real problems facing this country.
Airport security and passenger screening existed long before the creation of the TSA, and friskings were part of the screening, when the private security firms were unable to resolve alarms. Face it: The opposition to the TSA is being stirred up by internet rabble rousers Alex Jones and Matt Drudge. The majority of fliers just want to get to their destinations safely.

Anonymous said...

So not only does the TSA not understand security, they also don't understand the Constitution. Even a dull 4th grader with basi civics knowledge knows your explanation is entirely incorrect.

Mike Little said...

@bloggerbob... by moderated, you mean censored. i won't be surprised if a lot of these comments deleted tomorrow. i've cached them just in case. i've read through them and don't think i see 2 that are "for" the TSA.

i have flown a lot... been through the pat down... and i think it IS a violation not only of my privacy, but also of common decency. i DO NOT feel safer, but I DO feel violated by the government that is supposed to PROTECT my liberties, not restrict them.

Anonymous said...

Maybe we could do pat-downs like a game show: if the agent actually finds something in a pat down, he/she gets to retire immediately with a $1 million bonus on top of full pension vesting. And if they find nothing, the person who got patted-down gets to punch the agent in the eye. Something tells me the agents would start to search a little bit more discriminately. To be fair to the TSA, all we need is one terrorist to plant a bomb on a baby and everyone will blame TSA for not detecting it, so my game show approach attempts to balance the competing objectives. It would also make for an interesting reality TV show. Maybe we cold plant a device on someone in a huge airport like Atlanta, and see how long it takes TSA to find it, and people could call in like American Idol and bet on the various TSA agents. That would be be sweet.

Oh, by the way, Josh D, you are a moron. When is the last time TSA patted down anyone boarding a train? Ever heard of Madrid or London? Do we really think the terrorists are THAT stupid that they would constrain themselves to just bombing our airplanes? The TSA people just do what they are told so don't blame them, but the administration(s) that give them their marching orders are all idiots , or worse

Anonymous said...

We can always SECEDE from the UNION. If the battle for freedom is to begin let it begin here!

Anonymous said...

Aviation Security is not even a suggested power in the Constitution so the Supremacy Cause does not apply.

If this passes and Texas enforces it's perfectly legitimate law, we'll see just how powerless the Federal Government is.

Of all the several, and soverign, States, I would not expect Texas to back down easily.

Prediction: DHS will issue a 'temporary procedure change' for Texas until the 'legal issues' are 'resolved'.

Anonymous said...

The whole idea of the TSA having a "blog" (originally taken from the phrase "web log") is ridiculous. Individuals write diaries, keep journals, and write blogs. Calling information from a Federal government agency a "blog" is disingenuous, at best. Seriously, this is all information produced by the TSA. Writers paid to disseminate official government information, that's not a blog, by definition.

Anonymous said...

The earlier statement of being 100% safe inside the sterile area is the silliest thing I've read in a while. There is plenty of "contraband" that gets carried though checkpoints every day by accident that does not alarm. You are not 100% safe anywhere at anytime, to believe otherwise is naive at best.

Jive Dadson said...

Constitution lesson for Blogger Bob...

The Supremacy Clause refers to "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made IN PURSUANCE THEREOF." [Emphasis added.]

There is nothing in the enumerated powers that gives the federal government the right to frisk travelers without warrant or probable cause. Indeed the Fourth Amendment outright bars it:

"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 seize." [Emphasis added.]

As Thomas Jefferson so eloquently argued, the States have not only the right, but the duty to nullify unconstitutional laws.

Anonymous said...

Part of the problem with the initiation of these invasive patdowns and scanners is the dubious way in which the Christmas bomber of 2009 was let on the plane bypassing security with the aid of an official. There was also the conflict of interest between the head of homeland security (Chertoff) and his financial interest in the dangerous x-ray scanners- don't you dismissively believe it is safe not without some real science behind it. It is amazing to see some of those TSA agents stand next to the scanners while they are operating absorbing the backscatter.

Has Bobb Barr received his FOIA request yet concerning the stand down on National Opt Out day this past thanksgiving? Or is it that those of us who question the need for these security measures, an encroachment on freedom, are still labeled domestic extremists for not wanting to have some stranger grope us down or expose ourselves to x-rays every time we fly?

By the way, for your citation of the constitution I am wondering if you mean article IV SECTION 3 Clause 2 since the previous Section 2 has a clause on extradition and that section which you refer mentions "needful" rules which are arbitrary. If such grope downs are necessary then why stall them on one of the most traveled days of the year such as around thanksgiving. You undermine that clause when you engaged in the standown. Those of us Americans who are awake are aware of the encroachment of our rights as citizens of the United States through such acts by the TSA to declare us not as people but as property of this current corrupt government.

For those of you who commented on flying being a privilege I will say that in New York Senator Schumer suggested that Amtrak develop a no-ride list utlizing similar measures currently engaged by TSA. If this happens then what will the comments be? Riding a train is a privilege and not a right? Then such measures will expand to public transportation (buses and train/metro) that will be a privilege too? Next, you will need a security card/id to work and shop and I suppose some of you who are deluded about flying will say that those are privileges as well. Once the floodgate to removing rights are initiated, they do not end without resistance.

By the way here is a link to the constitution WITH the amendments.


http://www.usconstitution.net/const.pdf

Anonymous said...

Have you ever tried complaining at a TSA line? That stat is a joke. I fly almost every week, what the TSA does far outweighs the need. Exactly how many terrorists have we stopped at TSA checkpoints?

Anonymous said...

Fact: The last time I flew out of Tulsa last month, 100% of flyers were scanned or patted down.

Anonymous said...

No offence, but last I checked the TSA has failed to catch every single terrorist attempt/attack since 9/11. every single attempt has been stopped by passengers, the same people you "screen" convieniently you are afraid to give extra screening to passengers that may actually look like terrorists for fear of hurting thier feelings. Well the passengers, IMHO are more then capable of stopping any attacks now, the terrorists last attempt on 9/11 was thwarted by passengers and every attempt since has been as well. Stop harrassing the people actually doing your job. you guys need to actually get a terrorists before it happens, to actually be able to argue your tactics work.

Anonymous said...

United States v. Alfonso Lopez, Jr., 514 U.S. 549 (1995)


Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote, "We start with first principles. The Constitution creates a Federal Government of enumerated powers."

Anonymous said...

"Those who trade freedom for security deserve neither"

-Ben Franklin

Anonymous said...

The threat doesn't exist anymore of a group of hijackers carrying knives or guns aboard a plane. Terrorists aren't going to try this. It's fact, not speculation. Terrorists plans for years now have never mentioned anything of the sort of hijacking. Further, the public's attitude has completely changed since 9/11. No longer will a plane filled with passengers and flight crew sit idly by while terrorists take control of it. Training for air crew prior to 9/11 was just this: to do nothing and allow terrorists to take the plane, land it and go through the demands/hostage phase. Now, obviously, the game has totally changed.

Also, these heightened security measures, which were instituted after the shoe bomber (take shoes off) and the underwear bomber (full body scanner/full body pat downs) these flights originated from Paris and Amsterdam respectfully. They were outside threats. However, Europe hasn't changed its security screening procedures. We in the US have based on an outside threat.

The only reason TSO's are there is to stop an IED. And if a terrorist had any amount of training or really even some common sense, he could easily out smart these so-called heightened security procedures.

Checkpoints are security theater / a violation of human dignity.

It's quite pathetic seeing day in day out innocent people treated like they're terrorists.

I know. I was formerly in airport security.

Anonymous said...

Guess they didn't read the rest of that.
.." any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Anonymous said...

If you wonder why TSA has credibility issues and the public lacks confidence this article provides a good example... for those who are not challenged by an incredibly poor public education system - "Complaints" from those patted down NOT .00003

YOUR STATE - Fact: Only a small percentage of the traveling public receives a pat down as they travel through the security checkpoint. Between November 2010 and March 2011, TSA screened nearly 252 million people. In that same time period, we received 898 complaints from individuals who have experienced or witnessed a pat down. That's roughly 0.0004%.

THE REAL FACT: the % of those patted down complaining is 0.0119%. It needs to be calculated on % of those patted down that complained. A small %? Yes? However, those who understand "complaints" KNOW fewer than 2% of those who harbor legitimate complaints ever actually take the time to file a complaint. WE also know in America the general public is gulliable enough to believe their "pat down" is necessary/makes sense/is really providing them protection. That accounts for more than half the American people.
I suppose this massive TSA bureaucracy really doesn't care. When was the last time anyone heard this organization ACKNOWLEDGING anything it did or anyone it hired was a mistake? Enough said.

Cathy said...

Myth: The federal government can do whatever it wants.

Fact: The right of the people to be seure 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. (Constitution; Amendment 4)

Anonymous said...

I have concerns, most of which have already been stated by others here. My question: Are TSA agents changing their gloves between EVERY SINGLE PATDOWN? If not, they are spreading disease/bacteria/viruses from one passenger to the next. If I insist that an agent change their gloves, will they? Or will I be asked if I "want to fly today?"

Anonymous said...

1984 was a movie.......feel free to inform the rest of your buddies!

Resist Tyranny said...

A TSA explanation of the Constitution is insulting, at best. Texas has exactly the right idea: defy the Federal government when it over-reaches and poses a threat to citizens.

Most of what the TSA does violates the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees American citizens protection from unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant and/or probable cause for suspicion.

Since 99.99999999% of travelers are not terrorists, they are not a threat to travel security. There is no probable cause.

We also know that the TSA is very good at intimidation, which is reflected in the low number of complaints. That's hardly justification for violation of our Constitutional rights.

Anonymous said...

All of you negative people are idiots.

Babys, kids, toddlers don't get patted down unless they alarm the walk through metal detector!
It can be used as a method of getting something through security from an adult thinking that the child will not be screened!

think you idiots!

Anonymous said...

God bless Texas!!!

William Clardy said...

Blogger Bob,

Your comments about only limited numbers of complaints is an ad populum fallacy in what is an inherently legal argument.

The pertinent fact is that only one federal district court has found mandatory passenger searchs to not violate the Fourth Amendment, and that only by refering to them as "inspections". It is significant that no court has considered whether the TSA procedures prior to the introduction of AIT still fit within any reasonable legal definition of inspection.

With the caveat that most of the TSA folks I have dealt with have been polite (albeit tone-deaf to the legalities of their duty), your agency's employment of "advanced imaging technology" is claiming a legal authority to conduct electronic strip searches and friskings which are more intrusive than those which normally accompanies an arrest, all with no pretense of specific probable cause nor any clear description of what is being sought.

It is also worth noting that agent comments such as, "You want to fly today, don't you?" when travelers challenge the search procedures are very similar to language which the courts have found to be coercive when uttered by police conducting warrantless searches.

Just to refresh everybody's memory, the actual language of the Fourth Amendment is, "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."

Anonymous said...

@JoshD
Sir, YOU are the idiot. Why do I state this strongly?

It STARTS with aviation. What about that YouTube video recently posted where bus passengers were screen by TSA at the end of their journey? Aren't passenger trains coming up under TSA scrutiny soon?
Why aren't these officers required to change gloves between EACH groping session if the sheeple's hygiene is so awful as voiced by one agent??
I see a bureaucracy that becomes massive in growth. A cancer that won't go away until certain things change. I'll make certain powers-that-be extremely angry if I state the obvious truth here.

Anonymous said...

Not that TSA cares, but I don't know anyone that thinks TSA is doing a good job. In my opinion, TSA represents everything that is wrong with our government....low quality employees, overeaching, eye not on the ball, and compelled to nanny state stuff. Sad.

Anonymous said...

So then if Federal law has establishes schedules for control pharmaceuticals, then why are states allowed to have stricter laws requiring a prescription of these medications despite the Federal code stating that C5's don't need them? Ohh, not to mention the states are allowed to change these schedules.

Anonymous said...

You aren't getting many complaints because people don't want to be on the TSA no-fly list and/or watch list. They don't want to be subject to additional harassment by the TSA and police state generally. They don't want to lose their jobs when the TSA decides to "put the screws" to them, or subject to a smear campaign utilizing all the myriad elements of federal power against them.



The fact is, you are intimidating Americans into silence with your heavy handed gestapo tactics. The same reason that free speech has been severely chilled because everyone knows you are intercepting everyone's communications, tracing their IP addresses, data mining, and profiling everyone at all times. DHS is merely the domestic equivalent of the NSA - busily spying on every American citizen with no regard for the 4th amendment of the United States constitution. To have you invoke the constitution as your defense of the rape of innocent women and children is disgusting and ironic in the extreme.

Anonymous said...

If you don't want to risk a pat down, don't fly. Flying is not a right. Pat downs do not violate your rights against unreasonalbe search and seizure.

You are requesting to fly. As such you are subject to pat down.

This is not a government agent stopping you on the street for no reason. This is not a government agent walking into your house for no reason. That would be a violation.

E. Snyder said...

49 U.S.C. § 40103(2) confirms each American's RIGHT to fly. It is not a privilege, it is a right which is even recognized in the U.S. Code.

A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit
through the navigable airspace.

Anonymous said...

I don't know about you but I'm so scared out of my mind, thanks to the mainstream media telling me that I should be afraid of all the scary terrorist threats that one could possibly encounter, that I can justify giving up all of my rights and freedoms in exchange for a little peace of mind! Thankfully, one day soon, we will all benefit from having government cameras in our living rooms to pick up the slack on the current "see something, say something" snitch-on-your-neighbor-or-brother nazi-esque programs failing to catch all that pose a danger to ourselves!

Anonymous said...

Raise your complaint number to 900, if not done already. TSA's role as reliable Democrat voter bloc is on display as they check at the front of the line for fake IDs. Recall the 9/11 bunch had real IDs in their possession. Wish I could get me some FERS/TSP retirement money, but without having to sexually assault a free people...hell I'd vote Democrat too

3% seems rather low. Only 3 of every 100 in line are supremely annoyed by the inanity of the TSA?

Anonymous said...

Who told the TSA they could spend taxpayer money on a blog?

Anonymous said...

Hey Blogger Bob, please define moderation for us. Does that mean deleting 99% of the comments because they disagree with you?

Anonymous said...

Murder is not a federal crime.
But it's illegal in Texas.
Do you think that a TSA screener can murder with impunity?

Anonymous said...

The fact that TSA is responding to efforts to end their trampling of our 4th Amendment rights with a constitutional argument would be hilarious if it weren't so alarming and sad.

On another note, it's nice to see that our tax dollars are being wasted on this ridiculous blog.

Reaganite said...

THE 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

"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."

What is so complicated about that single sentence codified and ratified more recently than the main Sections of the Constitution?

You can't tell me you have Probable Cause, much less REASONABLE suspicion to feel up a 6 year old AMERICAN girl or check the diaper of a 6 month old AMERICAN baby from an American city, with American I.D.

Any law enforcement officer that did what you do would be hit with a Federal Civil Rights law suit for violating the Constitution. I hope your agency will be as well.

What's to keep your TSA VIPR teams from setting up on bridges & highways inside the country and doing the same thing before American's travel by car? What?

We used to decry the Soviets for lining their citizens up and demanding their papers. You people are no different, only you're doing it in the name of Security Theatre & have a union.

The FACT is that the shoe bomber, the panty bomber, and the recent Yemeni trying to lower his shoulder and gain entry to a cockpit were ALL stopped by people on board the aircraft. While, I might add, you were busy checking Junior's poopy diaper and getting your big government power thrills by violating the 4th Amendment rights of the people that stopped them or watching X ray porn.

3000 people died on 9-11. In it's wake MILLIONS of law abiding US Citizens have had their fundamental Constitutional rights trashed by you and your organization.

Profile for the terrorists and nut jobs. Screen THEM using methods that give you a reasonable suspicion or probable cause and leave normal AMERICAN citizens alone.

Anonymous said...

I will continue to opt out of the scans until observes evidence of policies and actions such as profiling. Until then, you can grope me 4 time a week! A TSA "agent" in Denver told me that the scan snow "primary" - that is a blatant lie! After my most recent groping, I observed the security air several minutes and less than 20% of passengers were directed to the scanners; even less than that when 1 or 2 passengers exercised their right to opt out!

Anonymous said...

Why the heck are we paying some government bureaucrat to blog? This is why government needs overhauled. Too many people and not enough work to keep you busy so you make up work!

doug said...

"The pat-down is a highly effective tool to resolve certain alarms..."

That's disingenuous, and you know it. Nobody has an argument with you resolving an alarm. It's that you're now using the alarm as an excuse to take the pat-down much further than it needs to go.

So how about this: Next time someone with a metal implant sets of the alarm, why don't you simply RESOLVE THE ALARM? Wand 'em, determine the location, pat THAT area. Simple, quick, effective, and nobody would have any argument with it. Do you really need to feel grannie's crotch once you know what the metal is?

Anonymous said...

OK, "Blogger Bob" explain to all of us exactly what part of this you do not understand -

"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."

We know that you can type - can you read?

Anonymous said...

Article VI, Section II (as referenced by the author of this article), does NOT subject States to the whim of the Federal Government under the guise of the "Supremacy Clause".

Sadly, and regrettably from the author's standpoint, Enumerated Powers actually subject the Federal Government to the several states.

Mr. Pistole and his minions seem to enjoy ignorance of the fact that YOU DO NOT HAVE AUTHORITY UNLESS WE FREAKING GIVE IT TO YOU AND WE HAVE NOT!!!!

Sadly, the largest threat to American's freedom is, at this point, DHS.

Michael said...

It looks to me as if there is at LEAST 900 complaints in the comments section. Pitchforks and torches people, its time to stand up and put the TSA in their place, and that is at the service of the American people. The idiots who say we dont have a "right" to fly are just shills for the bureaucracy. We have the right to gather and associate freely, and that implies being able to travel to the places we wish to do this. When I was in West Berlin back in 1989 it sickened me to see the communists demand identity papers of random people in East Berlin. They were slaves to the government. Americans are forgetting WE are the government. Stand up and be heard!!

Anonymous said...

"Only passengers who alarm a walk through metal detector or AIT machine or opt out of the AIT receive a pat-down."

-Translation: Only those who do not want to be photographed naked will be touched inappropriately.

Anonymous said...

I dont fly anymore, ask me why.It's the TSA, I've lost all desire.

Filed complaints? Yea, who really thinks filing a complaint is get you anything beside being investigated.

2012 Real hope and change is gonna clean house!

Anonymous said...

I not sure if anyone has brought this yet but since this “authority” to pat us down was never enacted into law but the Congress or signed by the President then the supremacy clause of the Constitution wouldn’t apply to your regulation as it is not a law and Texas has every right to tell the TSA it will not violate the 4 amendmentwithin it's border.
Bob, you need to work on your Constitutional law.

G. Thomas White said...

I'm shocked at this, ALL of it, I took an Oath to uphold the constitution when I became a Marine 30 some years ago, Not an Oath the the feds or the president of the USA. My "contract" was to the people of the United States. My Oath had no term limit. ANYONE that says this is ok and makes you safer is against the Constitution ... "all enemies both foreign or DOMESTIC"... I have not forgotten my Oath, and I'm surely not alone.

I wonder what Oath you took blogger Bob, to get your TSA Job???

Brandon said...

Way to go Texas! While it's a clear violation of the Supremacy Clause, it should bring a potential Supreme Court case that will hopefully rule in favor of the Constitution. More states should pass similar acts.

Anonymous said...

This is a weak argument because it ignores the fourth amendment protections against unreasonable searches, and the more important natural right of people to be secure in their persons. Your plea to federal supremacy ignores the legitimacy of the law. What a disgrace. Do you people also hate liberty?

Anonymous said...

So Blogger Bob, can you tell me how TSA policies today are any different from any other totalitarian state's policies?

Anonymous said...

Only 898 complaints? What do you think all these post on this board are Mr. Bob? There are almost 175 complaints about this post alone.

Anonymous said...

Just so we all get oriented, can you delineate the things that you are not going to do because the US Constitution prohibits it? I'm thinking it is a short list and won't take much time.

Anonymous said...

I really don't care anymore. I quit flying and now life is much less stressful and I get to enjoy stopping to sights along the way.

With all of this post-911 crap, the time and cost for air travel is no longer less than taking a bus or renting a car.

If it wasn't for TSA, I wouldn't have realized how much I enjoyed good old fashioned road-trips.

Anonymous said...

The TSA needs to sit down and read the whole Constitution, not just the parts that they can misinterpret to their own ends. The TSA currently has terrible leadership, and if the Attorney General wasn't such a coward, he'd be prosecuting the TSA's participation in illegal search and seizure. For your reference Ms. Napolitano, check the Bill of Rights, if you weren't aware that there was such a thing as an illegal search and seizure.

Anonymous said...

Clearly Blogger Bob got his Constitutional facts wrong, but there's a better question we should be pondering:

Why are taxes paying for a TSA employee to editorialize about laws, maintain a blog and moderate comments? Clearly there's a problem with a federally contracted private security force when their spending time on marketing and P.R. efforts. I'm sorry Bob, but we The People shouldn't be supporting your propaganda and advertising efforts at all.

This doesn't help your credibility in the slightest, and hopefully this blatant attempt to skew opinion, will catch the attention of lawmakers. I'd start sharpening up that résumé Bob.

Anonymous said...

Those of us that have an artificial hip either get X-rayed to death or we get a pat down 100% of the time.

Anonymous said...

So who here is for the TSA and understand why they need to do this? All I am seeing is the 3%ers making apparent erroneous claims against the TSA. Their "job" is to "protect" us from "terrorists". Can we see some more positive feedback besides from Blogger Bob?

OldPhart said...

The TSA is a farce. There is zero security until there is 100% bag-matching to passengers. That means that there will never be lost luggage during a trip...ever. Until then, everything else is just smoke and mirrors to justify the invasion of privacy and the continued funding of the newest US Gestapo Corps.

You want true security? Match baggage and arm passengers.

Anonymous said...

Feel free to claim the "Supremacy clause" of the U.S. Constitution all you want but there is another clause that you may be unfamiliar with. It is the secession clause of the Texas Constitution. That means we can leave your country and go back to our own. And when that happens we can keep your little plains from landing here if we want. We can also keep your trucks from taking our oil and other petrochemical supplies. See what happens to the price of gasoline then. Oh wait, we have an extreme amount of farmland, dairy farms and chicken processing facilities. All of those equal food for our citizens. What are you going to do when you can't eat or drive your car? Oh by the way, we have more armed citizens than any other area per capita in the world.
I am tired of TSA pat downs every time I fly, which is nearly every week.

Anonymous said...

Isn't it time for your mandated 4 hour union break now?

Anonymous said...

ABSOLUTELY NOT CONSTITUTIONAL. Your argument is completely wrong. The feds can't extend their reach beyond the constitution and infringe on states rights. American citizens constitutionally have freedom of movement and the right to not unlawfully being searched.

One of your agents was just arrested for child porn, also...so pedophiles have access to children in lines to pat them down now?

How stupid do you people think the American people are?

YOU PEOPLE ARE NUTS. THIS IS TYRANNY. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS AND EVENTUALLY, YOU WILL NEED TO STOP THIS ATROCITY WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TERRORISTS REALLY AT ALL.

Anonymous said...

The constitution DOES NOT give you the right to pat down anybody without probable cause!
The sad thing is that the TSA really believes it is keeping us safe. They are actually in violation of the 4th amendment of the constitution, which Texas may have the right to enforce!

Anonymous said...

How does frisking my 89 year old grandmother or 4 month old infant improve security? You are another big government jobs program that has only failures to point to and not a single success in preventing terrorism.

Anonymous said...

The Constitution specifically prohibits illegal search and seizure.
You may want to brush up on it before you publish your propoganda.

Anonymous said...

You guys can whine all you want. The TSA is not going to do what it thinks it needs to do to protect our country. Wrong or right, it is not an easy job. I travel almost every week and I have never received a pat down. Most of you folks who say you are patted down every time are telling stories to make your point.

Anonymous said...

TSA Fail - documented fail since inception to stop ONE single hijacking attempt on any transportation vehicle

TSA Fail - fail since inception to demonstrate in any reasonable fashion the need for the invasive and unreasonable search of EVERY US citizen that chooses to fly domestically.

TSA Fail - fail on uncountable - too numerous to count - occasions to detect potential threats at security check points - by performance checkers and non-threat public.

Fail - Fail - Fail

On and on with no sense of shame or even acknowledgement of failure. A righteous devotion to 'duty' is no defense for abject failure at every juncture.

Anonymous said...

There is no power enumerated in the constitution to establish a TSA, and there is no constitutional amendment either for a TSA. The people have the right to shut down this illegitimate personal assault.

Anonymous said...

The Fourth Amendment prevents unreasonable searches and seizures.

Pitiful excuses here. Is this really the best TSA can do to excuse their acts?

Anonymous said...

OH WOW YOU TSA PEOPLE ARE SOMETHING ELSE I SWEAR -- all you have to do is go to google and look up kids being touched by TSA and find video after - video -- They way you write this the federal government answers to know one? is that the way yall see it??? The States have the right to say NO --

Anonymous said...

Just because you've received a limited number of complaints, doesn't mean the rest of the people are okay with your screening practices. It would be interesting to know if fewer people are flying for example.

Bill said...

@Anonymous Said "gov has no Constitutional right to search anyone without a warrant." Actually that is not true. U.S. Customs (Now Customs and Border Protection) has border authority to detain and search any person entering or departing the USA, without reason, other than mere suspicion, and without warrant. As many of young lawyers have discovered in court when appealing a case based upon their mistaken concept of the law at the border.
Retired Customs Officer

Anonymous said...

Your use of statistics is extremely deceptive. If only 3% of the 252 million screened air traveling population receives pat downs then 898 'individual' complaints about said pat downs is not .0004% nor do you take into account the vast majority that would rather keep a low profile and make it on their flight rather than stir the wrath and consequences of your rather nasty organization.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 1032   Newer› Newest»