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   401 – 600 of 1032   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

The act of commerce does not waive the Fourth Amendment right to not be subject to unreasonable searches and seizures.

If airline travel is a privilege, then so is driving on the interstate. State troopers have no more right to stop cars arbitrarily and search for drugs or weapons than TSA has to search travelers without cause.

Josh D, under your reasoning, anyone who drives, walks, rides a bike, or rides a subway, bus, or taxi, is exercising a "privilege."

By the way, pay attention to the spell check notification before you call other people idiots.

The number of people complaining is also an invalid factor. Research has consistently shown that the for every person who feels strongly enough to complain about something, many others will simply walk away and consider it useless to complain. It's the reason corporate CEOS will give huge attention to the people who actually sit down and write complaint letters. It's a weighted variable with high importance in terms of customer/citizen response.

Emory said...

In lieu of TSA, just issue each boarding passenger a taser or pistol or pepper spray to be collected at their destination.

It would save the phenomenal waste of money and time that TSA costs and optionally could be used on obnoxious seat mates and unruly kids.

Anonymous said...

It is reprehensible that the Federal government continues to use the archaic physical pat downs when a non-intrusive scanner is available.

Anonymous said...

People of the USA make the TSA go away. It's why we have a second amendment.

Anonymous said...

For the ignorant ones who claim that TSA search are not a violation of 4th amendment rights because we do not have a right to fly, you need to re-think your argument.

It is established that an unwarranted search of an automobile is not legal. Do you have a right to drive that automobile on public streets? No it is a privilege; but you do retain the right that prohibits unreasonable search of you and your property.

It is not legal to stop a person walking on the street and search their person. Do you have a right to walk on that street? No, but you are secure in your person.

The Federal government does not own airports; they do not own airlines. They have accreted the power to search in airports because we have acquiesced--up to a point.

Anonymous said...

The Constitution says that federal government cannot be regulated by the stated WITHIN THE ENUMARATED POWERS. It certainly does not mean that there are no limits on the federal government. The fed has encroached on states rights far to much, for far too long. Like the ridiculous interpretation of the Commerce Clause that says "everything affects interstate commerce at some level, therefore we can regulate everything." This must stop, and this will stop. It might as well begin here.

If the states say "no" then the answer is no. Figure out what your next move is, WITHIN the Constitution. Don't try to twist the Constitution to allow you to exceed your righful limits. One abuse gets used to justify the next abuse. That's how we got here.

mike k said...

Why do we need pat downs at all? Make the airlines responsible for safety on their planes and problem solved.

Anonymous said...

I would never use the word "ashamed."
These agencies are well out of control and should be defunded IMMEDIATELY!
The heat will be on the rear sides of all these politicians to not raise this debt ceiling, and
remove funding for all these jokers.
Yes to funding our military and NO to all the big society agencies.

stagedlife said...

So the supremecy clause allows you an unfettered right to pat down girly parts? don't you think 6 yrs old is way too young for "enhanced" pat downs? or a new born? don't you think that is ridiculous?. Obviously not since someone already did it.

Let me clue you into a simple fact. There was only one age group, one gender all from one geographic area that stormed the cockpits of the airliners on 9/11 and they weren't a group of 6 yr. old girls. Doing what you are now doing is nothing more then political theater and HASN'T made this country ANY safer, you don't even screen the grounds crew. So continue to molest the great citizens of this Country. If you ever touch me we will find out in Court if in fact the Constitution allows you to public fondle people.

Discipuli antiqui said...

I can use the "others were doing it first" argument, too...Profile just like the Israelis do!

Anonymous said...

I have heard many people say they don't complain for one of two reasons. First, they are afraid of retaliation from the TSA. Just look at the pilot who sounded off about how screwed up TSA is. Second thing I have heard it most people don't believe it will have any effect. The TSA is a run-away bureacracy that believes it has no accountability to anyone.

Gordo said...

"The writer thinks it proper to say that, in his opinion, the Constitution is no such instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; but that by false interpretations, and naked usurpation's, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the Constitution itself purports to authorize. But this much is certain — that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." Lysander Spooner 1869

Anonymous said...

Please don't take this out on the TSA screeners. These are people that are former law enforcement officers, teachers, soldiers and people that truly believe that they are offering a safe alternative to what truly could be going on and not being actually reported to everyone on a daily basis. Those people are being forced to do these pat-downs and their positions are in jepordy should they refuse. They have to take an oath to do this job and have to comply with orders from above. They don't make this stuff up. You are beating the messengers. If you don't like it go to your representative and your President as all these people answer to him, it is his cabinet officials that are dreaming this stuff up. It is not joey TSA screening guy. Can anyone prove me wrong? Anyone? Buehler?

Anonymous said...

Blogger Bob should read the Constitution and teach others in the TSA about what it contains. Start with the 4th Amendment and move right into the Enumerated Powers. Interstate Commerce clause does not lead to 'enhanced patdowns' or any security measure, only the regulation of commerce, as in 'business', not of free citizens. This slide to tyranny is a shameful episode in American history.

Anonymous said...

To all those naive enough to believe that TSA is doing marvelous job or that the Federal Supremacy clause allows them to infringe on our rights (the constitutional right to travel is one of which):

1. All this draconian measures are a direct result of TSA to profile passengers - an absurd but successful attempt to stupidify themselves more than they are.

2. Federal Supremacy is not the same as in the Federal Tyranny or Federal Absolute Rule: it only states that in the areas where federal and state jurisdictions coincide, the state laws cannot contradict the federal laws.

Go learn something before you accuse others of being idiots.

Anonymous said...

I won't be flying after my 7 year old daughter, who has PTSD (long story), was targeted for a groping. It was a HORRIBLE situation resulting in my wife in tears and my 4 year old confused and frightened too. All I saw in our 10 minutes of hassle was TSA agent groping little kids! Something must be done. I didn't bother complaining because it will go nowhere, although I did write a letter to the airline. Good for Texas, we need WA to do the same.

- A middle class white, and obviously Al-CIA-da, family in Seattle who were going to a funeral.

Bayou Billy said...

Texas legislators, thanks for taking steps to defend liberty. TSA bureaucrats, you should be ashamed for your consistent attacks on liberty.

Your stats aren't a true reflection of how people in this country feel about your policies, by the way. And I think you realize that - common sense dictates that a great many people don't register complaints, and an even greater number is quite likely taking alternate forms of transportation (such as my whole family).

This TSA insanity HAS to end at some point. I know you guys who run things have to know that what you're doing is wrong. Pleas be honest with yourselves. Quit the jobs you have. I know you feel corrupt and you all know you're doing harm to America.

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. And in order to use this privelage you are allowing them to do pat-downs every time you buy an airline ticket. If you don't like the idea of the patdowns then find a different way of transportation. But it is no way a violation of your right."

How about this, JoshD: If you don't like the idea of the extremely unlikely chance that something bad will happen to you on an airplane, then YOU find a different way of transportation. Let the real Americans who understand that life is full of risks take responsibility for their own actions to board a plane without being irradiated and molested. All you cowards who are afraid of the bogeyman hiding under your beds don't have the right to allow our Fourth Amendment Right to be violated just because it makes you feel better.

Tom Nowak said...

Learn the Constitution before commenting on the validity of what you do.
The Act in question would not in any way regulate the Federal government, rather the actions on Texas soil.
Your ridiculous response would mean that officers couldn't arrest TSA agents committing any crime, simply because they are federal actors. Case law proves that idea to have been rejected years ago.

As for you refrencing "other agencies worldwide" you might recall that we do things a bit differently here when it comes to treating our citizens. I'm sure torture and cutting off arms is effective to deter crimes in other places, but we choose to do things differently here.

Anonymous said...

From the article: "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."

MYTH: There would be no screening of passengers if the government didn't do it. Airlines, long before the TSA was formed, did their own screening of passengers. They have an interest in seeing that their planes aren't crashed and their passengers killed. Law suits and replacing airplanes are expensive.

Anonymous said...

The Fed's policy on screening for terrorists is inept and illogical. It is based more on not offending certain groups, who by the way are the most likely terrorists, than trying to actually offer protection. You need to PROFILE likely offenders, and also have random searches. The TSA is probably one misguided event away from a major incident backlash. And when the Constitution stops protecting its citizens because it is abused be Fed institutions, something will eventually give.

Anonymous said...

Article. VI. Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof...

You lose right there, TSA. Any law that contradicts the Constitution or the Bill of Rights is UNconstitutional and NOT made IN PUSUANCE thereof.

The Supreme Court has stated as such on numerous occasions, and these "laws" fit right into that category.

Anonymous said...

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.

Raise complaint total to 900 per Benjamin franklin who literally is rolling over in his grave

Anonymous said...

Maybe there needs to be some action into other areas such as false advertising and misleading the public.
The TSA does have these powers under the constitution. But what is not mentioned is that they ARE NOT REQUIRED!! Some person has decided to use these. Some American, who most likely is exempted, has decided that other Americans are not trustworthy.
To state that all are subject to these is just plain incorrect.
Finally, and most importantly, the TSA should remember who they work for. Misuse of power can result in removal just as quickly as it was given!! The people put TSA in a position of trust, and TSA should work hard to ensure it is trusted. Currently it does not, it uses word games and power instead of honesty.
Constitutional powers for TSA were created in a day, and can be removed in a day. Contact your congressman, when they receive enough complaints, they will take action.
Complacency is no excuse for criminality. Even TSA cannot justify some of the workings which have been reported, in particular when failures at Border Security and Illegal Immigration are still competing against them at the top of the list.

Anonymous said...

Airports need to go back to Private SEcurity Screening. TSA does not do the job any better and cost the taxpayers a lot more money. Now they want to go Union so they can charge more. Kick them out. jls

Rob-man said...

I find it interesting that the TSA has not stopped a single terrorist attack. The "underwear bomber" and the "shoe bomber" both were stopped by regular US citizens. Your organization is sadly ONLY reactionary. You have not taken a single proactive step. If you'd get out of our way we'd do a lot better job than all of you.

Anonymous said...

The problem here is not the TSA in total. The problem is Janet Napolitano. We did not have these abuses of power under the Bush administration. They are obviously being driven from the top.

Anonymous said...

However it might be nice to have a TSO or two arrested to sort this out. That might have a chilling effect on the pat downs....

All Texas has to do is revoke their drivers' licenses. It is a privilege to drive, much as it is to fly, and Texas has an absolute (unquestioned) right to determine who can drive a vehicle on Texas roads.

So TSA wants to play hardball, fine, Texas yanks their driver's licenses. And they can walk to work....

Anonymous said...

I and my extended family of 14 decided to drive 1300 miles one way instead of flying and have the chance of our wonderful TSA government employees trying to feel up my 14 year old daughter. You think I am the only one? Also one comment said it was a privilege for us to fly, what happens when it is a privilege for us to take a walk, or go to a park? The 4th amendment is for all unreasonable search and seizure, if they don't have a court order than no search.

Anonymous said...

Interlude: TSA Blogging HQ, undisclosed location.

GMan#1: "Hey Bill, what's that part in the Constitution about the states?"
GMan#2: "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."
GMan#1: "No, dummy. The part that when you quote it out of context makes it sound like the federal government can do whatever it wants to people."
GMan#2: "Oooohh. You want the Supremacy Clause."
GMan#1: "YES. That's it."
*writes this blog post*
GMan#1: "Nailed it. TSA FTW."

IraqVet said...

Okay Bob the Blogger,

after reviewing your bio I was a little curious as to how you reconcile what you do now with the oath you once took to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic"?

As a combat veteran who has seen this manufactured (endless)war from the frontlines, I still maintain my oath and fidelity.

Clearly, on some or all levels of awareness you know that what the TSA is doing is done under the color of law...and is a clear a blatant violation of our Constitutional inheritance...Just as DHS draws it authority from the unPatriot Act. We both know, as do many on this forum, that this the frog in the water syndrome...but it is becoming more blatant as the government turns up the heat.

It is interesting to note, that we treated the Iraqi people with a higher level of respect and dignity than we do the American people despite the higher risk of a "terrorist attack".


From a historical perspective, how do you distinguish what what you do under the authority of the DHS/unPatriot Act and the East German Stasi or the Soviet NKVD?

Where, but in a totalitarian society, does a government authorize treating free people as suspects and criminals when no laws have been broken?
Where, in a free society, does government derive its authority to deny its Citizens the right to say "no" to being touched or scanned?

What is the difference between an unwanted enhanced pat down and full body scan...and being molested or pornography?

How in good conscious can you support this kind of mentality when it flies directly in the face and intent of our founding fathers?

Anonymous said...

Blogger Bob,

Since you want to quote the Constitution, exactly what part of the Constitution authorizes the TSA to regulate who can and cannot board an aircraft?

Anonymous said...

funny how the agency that violates the fourth amendment is trying to use the constitution to invalidate state law...kinda ironic...just saying...

Anonymous said...

You really think you are above the law? Just because you work for the federal govt does not give you the right to grope individuals, especially children and babies. The person performing this AND their supervisor AND those defending the practice should be immediately fired!!

Anonymous said...

God bless Texas!

Anonymous said...

moderator bob,

then moderate out all the ones who show Supremacy clause is superceded by enumerated powers. Moderate out all those who think this is government intrusion to our private lives. Moderate out all those who don't agree with the "Party" line just like all totalitarian regimes do. Or ones trying to become totalitarian regimes.

Anonymous said...

I've complained numerous times to the White House, my Congresspeople, and to the airlines I used to fly before these body scanners and invasive patdowns were put into airports. So ratchet your official complaint number up by one.

I also don't like your notion that, "If no one complains, we can get away with it." Is that how policy is made at the TSA?

Anonymous said...

The supremacy clause does mean the states cannot pass a law that conflicts with Fed law....however...i find it odd that the TSA did not attempt to deconflict the fact that the 4th amendment says that citizens are to be "secure in their person" ... and "against unreasonable searches" and that "shall not be violated ... but upon probable cause."

So, the TSA is implicitly arguing that since i desire to travel, i am therefore subject to have the gov't touch me anywhere and with whatever technique of the day they deem appropriate?

There is a word for that...it's called authoritarian sociopath. That is what best describes about 75% of the people occupying elected office...think about all the czars and shadow gov't officials that aren't even elected.

"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...

Technological Suppression of Americans.

Andrew said...

"Blogger 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

May 15, 2011 5:05 PM"



Mmmm...okay. Not only does TSA implement the federal gubmint's "you-are-our-chattel" policy, they would also squelch free speech. Oh, hey---wait a minute. Ain't that protected by the 1st Amendment? You know...part of the document you cite to justify your oppression of American citizens?

We are Texas, and we are coming after the federal gubmint. We're going top castrate you because we know the federal gubmint exists with and only with our permission. We have had ENOUGH.

Anonymous said...

Hmmm, I remember reading about Pistole stating that the TSA failure rate is average 70% in some airports its 100%. I also remember MythBusters Adam Savage being able to get 9 inch long razor blades past the Naked Body Scanners. So...TSA is more of a Hemorrhage on the tax payer than a savior. I like to know what would stop a terrorist from driving an SUV filled with explosives onto the tarmac? The chainlinked fence. TSA is a security FARCE

Anonymous said...

As a Canadian who used to frequently travel to the US on both business and recreational pursuits, I no longer fly to, through or over the US unless I have absolutely no choice as the only means of objection I can file is economic. No more of my travel dollars will be spent subjecting myself or my elderly father to degrading and pointless patdowns and radiation exposure in order to ameliorate the paranoia of the Homeland Security Agency.

Jared Lorz said...

That's great you've finally started reading the constitution! Please continue until you reach Amendment IV! You know, the part where it explains that you're full of shit and the constitution explicitly forbids you from doing this! Homeland Security has been turned inward on the people as it always was intended. You are worthless parasites and should all be fired. Out of a cannon. Into the Sun.

Anonymous said...

You cannot make people safer by violating the right they have to unreasonable searches.
It has in fact yielded not one success and only shows that the terrorist have won on some level.
a 9 11 01 will never happen again. The passengers will not allow it and the doors to the cockpit are secure. While some security is needed the TSA will NEVER do what is really needed to be effective and that is profile.
I respect my government but my leaders, both Rep and Dem are wrong.

Anonymous said...

I have a metal plate in my head, put in to repair injuries caused in combat while serving this formerly great nation. I suppose that means a TSA agent must manually stimulate my genitals each time I fly. Not a problem, since I don't trust this "government" to provide security. The only thing they seem to do well is generate "revenue" by stealing from those few of us that work.

F said...

The Supremacy Clause says that the States are bound to respect the supremacy of any law made in accordance to the U.S. Constitution. Amendment 4 of this Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches. Amendment 5secures Due Process therefore there can be no arbitrary detention. The TSA has no enumerated power to check baby's behinds or grope a single person. Their procedures are Unconstitutional under the 4th and 5th Amendment not to mention they have no enumerated power so the Supremacy Clause does not apply.

Anonymous said...

Just to be clear. Government website. Government can track your posts. Just saying. LOL HI BIG BROTHER

Anonymous said...

The TSA is treating Americans as criminals with sexual pat downs.

The police pat down criminals and rightly so for violating the law.

Thus the TSA is commiting a crime of sexual assault against innocent law abiding people.

Therefore, the TSA is evil, because the TSA is immoral for sexually assulting innocent men, women, children and babies.

Charlie said...

I believe each State should be able to come up with their own security procedures.

We don't want the Federal government doing this.

We want the federal government to be responsible for coinage and arming milita against people who attack us on our land.

Get out of our live, Federal government. You are in it for your selfish selves - your career, your retirement and your power.

Let the States decide, each one for themselves.

So all power to Texas for the first to stand up for states rights.

The constituion severely limits Federal authority. It is up to the people to reign in the Federal monster.

John said...

You want to talk Constitution? I want to talk Bill of Rights, which in the 4th amendment protects against unlawful searches and seizures. Groping the genitals of a child, according to your guidelines, is acceptable, which puts you at direct odds with the 4th Amendment. Yes they are rare, but the fact that a TSA employee is not automatically FIRED for committing such a vile act discredits the rules by which you abide.

Anonymous said...

It is extremely disingenious to claim such a low number of complaints when the calculations only include writen official complaints. I am sure that number is exponentally exceeded on a daily basis through verbal/in person complaints to supervisors and agents.

MAC said...

So….The supremacy clause of the Constitution now means the Federal Government can violate the Constitutional rights of Americans at will?

george said...

I doubt 3% opt out of the x-ray scanners. I've heard from others that people avoid these scanners like a plague.

As for the less than <.1% who file a complaint, polls show that the vast majority of americans are against touching groins and breasts.

But when did the federal government actually behave like a democracy?

Anonymous said...

The constitution says you need a search warrant to search anyone. Have you got one of those for every passenger you search? Didn't think so. It also says a warrant can only be issued based on probable cause. Did you have probable cause to believe a frightened 6 year old little girl was carrying a bomb? Didn't have that either did you. You guys blatantly abuse the constitution and then claim it protects your power which it doesn't.

jtom58 said...

Well, from the looks of things I would say the comments aren't too favorable for the TSA.

For me, I haven't flown since these new measures have gone into effect. Don't plan to either. Used to be a frequent flyer, but I'll look for other ways to get around. It has been a hardship from a work standpoint, but getting "patted down" is not anything I want to be a part of.

Good riddance to the TSA!

Anonymous said...

No one is exempt. Do they pat down congressman, and politicians that fly commercial...Oh yeah that's right they all seem to get MAC flights or private jets to take them around.

Sencho said...

Myth: The TSA is well within its rights to enact the kind of searches being conducted by the TSA's policies.

Fact: "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."

So TSA...start getting warrants or stop violating your bosses rights.

Anonymous said...

How COMPLETELY ironic that the TSA uses the fact that the U.S. Constitution is the "Supreme Law of the Land" to support its continuing violation of 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Here it is, verbatim:
"Article the sixth ...... 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."

Sarah said...

You may add me to the list of complaints. Interesting that the claim is made that only 898 people have complained. Yet this blog has nearly 200 posts. Hmmmm...did over 20% of those who filed complaints just happen to read this article and post a complaint? I doubt it. TSA, you are pumping out lies and propaganda. Americans as a whole are outraged. I travel around the country extensively, and I've only found a few people who think this is OK.

And that you would use the Supremacy Clause to back up your actions? I won't even dignify that asinine assertion with a rebuttal. You know you are lying through your teeth.

Trinity said...

The Original definition of Terrorism is 1. Government by intimidation.

Oxford Dictionary of the English Language

Government agencies have turned to terrorism to protect us from terrorists?

Anonymous said...

The TSA is just out of control and needs to be reigned in.

Q. How many bombing/hijack attempts has the TSA foiled or caught?

A. ZERO!!!!!

Anonymous said...

the TSA is allowed to do what they do because you signed up to be a part of their federal franchise, stop using "public" transportation and fly privately, no TSA

the airlines are owned by the federal government just like the banks are, you want to use their services? then sign away your rights.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the threat errr.. warning, Blogger Bob.
-----------
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

Anonymous said...

I have not flown since I retired in 1997. I was sick and tired of being harassed by airport security long before 9/11. I drive all over the US, in relative tranquillity, well. except twice highway patrol stopped me with no probable cause at all. Made up lies as an excuse for stopping me, hoping to find a reason to steal my car. For the clowns who claim I deserved to be stopped, I have never had a moving violation in my life, and have driven over 250,000 miles since I retired

Robb said...

One complaint is one too many. You seem to have no regard for people's rights. Not surprising. I relish the idea that one of your goons will be arrested for your unconstitutional actions here in Texas. I just hope every other state in the Union follows our example. You have no idea what security means. If you did, you'd be following El Al's example, or possibly even the examples of the European Airports. If anyone ever wondered why people were against government creep, well... they aren't wondering any longer.

MH said...

"Well, the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article. VI. Clause 2) prevents states from regulating the federal government."

You cannot quote a section of the Constitution and ignore all other of its holistic parts. Any 1L knows this. Doesn't the TSA have lawyers? Maybe that isn't a good question, seeing how the TSA operates.

Anonymous said...

All I can say is that the old adage about "a little authority in the hands of a fool is a dangerous thing," comes true with the TSA and all involved with it.

Anonymous said...

As a general rule...I'm opposed to the intrusive patdowns/xrays that are the norm these days. I've been traveling regularly for 30 years (logging hundreds of thousands of miles) and to say it's gotten exponentially worse in the last couple of years is a gross understatement. And they appear to have yielded exactly nothing. I don't like it and I think the feds are on a power high. My biggest complaint however is with the down right rudeness of the TSA employees. My estimation is that 7 out of 10 of the ones I encounter are incredibly rude.

That said....on a recent family trip to PHL from ATL...in the ATL security line my 12 year old daughter set off the metal detector...after removing practically everything (the other 2 made it through). I was busy getting my crap on the conveyor and glanced over at the situation and the TSA agent on the other side. With a minimal amount of eye contact and body language...I communicated to the TSA agent that she was "mine" and he let her go. No questions asked...no pat downs.

Kudos to him!!!

Anonymous said...

Sorry Bob but the Feds are not supreme; we the people are and we the people don't like what the TSA is doing nor the way they're doing it.

You need to find a better way, including profiling or we the people will change things November 2012.

That is all...

Anonymous said...

The Supremecy Clause is valid only if the federal government is lawfully upholding the Constitution...which obviously isn't the case when a federal agency --- for instance, the TSA --- is instructed to ignore the Fourth Amendment to the Constitition. The State of Texas is sadly doing what the derelict Obama Administration is not doing,
namely, revering the very document upon which this country is founded.
Texas 1, Constitution 1, Obama Administration 0.

Anonymous said...

It has been many times already but bears repeating: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

To those that would say, "Well, we live in dangerous times", I would say, "I agree, uncontrolled government power has become very dangerous."

Anonymous said...

blah blah blah

Anonymous said...

Just thought I'd drop in , ask a question, and give you an opinion, Mr. Blogger Bob. (Now -- moderate away) Since when does the present "administration" pay any attention to the U.S.Constitution unless it benefits them in some twisted way? That was my question, and here's my opinion: I opine, Mr. Bob that since no one can answer my question with any degree of accuracy or common sense, you'll "moderate" this comment entirely out of existence. Happy Groping!

Matt Chappel said...

It's OBVIOUS that the entire existence of the TSA is unconstitutional according to the fourth amendment. It's VERY clear... A federal employee CANNOT under any circumstances, search a person without a warrant or probable cause that the individual has committed a CRIME.

Ladies and gentlemen, this arrogance displayed by our federal government is OUTRAGEOUS. They're trying to use the Constitution against the very people it's supposed to protect from tyrannical, overstepping federal government.

The Constitution was meant to protect The People from the government. NOT the other way around.

I support Texas all the way with this bill.

Anonymous said...

So, from that, we can assume that the first day after the Texas statute becomes law, a TSA agent will violate it, after which they will be arrested.

And then, the show begins. Get your popcorn.

Anonymous said...

--""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."

It's. Right. There.

If a State makes a Law, the State Law overrides the Federal Law in that State. That's what the Constitution says.--


Actually, that's the opposite of what it says. "Notwithstanding" means the state laws FALL to the federal, not the other way around.

I am no fan of the TSA or the way they do their jobs, but the Constitution simply does not say what you claimed it to say.

gutless said...

There is no constitutional basis for the TSA whatsoever.

Anonymous said...

Thank you to the Texas House for passing HB 1937 which takes a stand against invasive groping by the TSA.

I'm emailing thank yous to several members who played a key role in getting that passed.

Does anyone know what committee it is going to in the Texas Senate? I want to write emails of support to them, as well.

Anonymous said...

Bob, if you're going to bring up the Constitution, when is the TSA going to limit its search to the constitutionally-allowable limits of an administrative search; that is, searching for weapons and explosives?

Jim Triche said...

If you moderate the posts that aren't TSA friendly, you'll go from 170+ comments to 2.

The TSA is a ridiculous product of a nanny state. Big Brother is checking your pockets. (and your crotch)

This convenient excuse of international terrorists simply removes more of our rights than ever before.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

Anonymous said...

I have an artificial foot. As a result, I get a pat down every time I fly. If this is your idea of security, may God help us all. If stupidity were a crime, the management of TSA would be serving life sentences with no possibility of parole.

Anonymous said...

I hope that the terrorists have more belief in the abilities of the TSA than the american public does...

Anonymous said...

The TSA response here is totally bogus. Texas didn't try to ban pat downs, it says you can't touch people's privates. Why is the TSA trying to defend the practice of pat downs? We've all seen the video of the 6 year old girl getting her buttocks touched with the backs of the fingers of the TSA agent. Why do you lie and say that doesn't happen? Did she set off a metal detector like you say, or did her mother refuse to let her walk thru the detector? There is video all over the Internet that clearly contradicts what's in this response. Texas is right. Stop touching the junk. And by the way, states have rights too. I can't wait for Texas state troopers or local police to arrest a TSA agent.

Anonymous said...

Ok, so while states cannot regulate the federal government, it DOES however have to follow the constitution. The forth amendment to the Bill of Rights says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..." Tell me where it says the federal government gets let off from following the constitution.

Anonymous said...

3% of Americans are having their 4th amendment rights violated is 3% too many.

Anonymous said...

Well the TSA is pleading the Supremacy Clause eh let’s have a look: 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.
Having established that the gov't is bound to follow the Laws of the Land than let me quote one such law that has to be followed: Amendment IV in the Bill Of Rights 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. So I say where is the just cause where are the warrants issued and what right do you have to search a Sovereign U.S. Citizen without following the Rule Of Law. Fact is the TSA has no right whatsoever if you want to claim homeland security we have a Constitutional Agency in place for this and it's called the military.

Anonymous said...

I am seriously not flying anymore because of this. This whole "submit to travel" business is a sure mark of the making of an even more oppressive state. All this will do will make the Airlines even more strapped for cash, but I guess that doesn't matter because they will just get a taxpayer funded bailout adding a few more lead weights to our sinking nation.

Anonymous said...

What the TSA failes to comprehend is that the passengers that they are harassing are the very best line of defense we have. Since 9/11 there have been countless stories of passengers stopping the unruly and the terrorists. Not once has the TSA stopped a terrorist. Only those who question them.

Ken Wells said...

Who let the 9/11 hijackers into the country? Oh, yeah... it was the federal government.

Who banned off duty law enforcement personel from carrying their weapons on commercial aircraft? Oh, yeah... it was the federal government.

Who was it that hijacked 4 airliners? Was it babies? No. Was it the attractive twenty something women I always see getting the extra attention at TSA "security"? No.

Homeland security and TSA are turning our nation into a police state, burning billions of dollars in tax money and just generally harrassing our people and eating out their substance.

We've been here and we cast out the tyrants before. Time to do it again.

Anonymous said...

I, nor my family will ever fly again, unless it is in a private aircraft.
However, some need to get it right. It's right to travel, not right to transportation, Brenda dear.
Yes, you have a right to travel, but you don't have any rights to specific transportation. The airlines are private corporations, and as such have the right to dictate the terms you must agree to before using their form of transportation. Those terms are set by the .gov not as to searches.
If you don't like the arrogance, thuggery, and sexual misconduct of the TSA, don't choose to fly. Simple as that. We made that choice long ago. Our right to travel isn't infringed on..we can drive, take a train, take a boat,or make arrangements to charter a private flight to avoid the TSA's groping security. Just don't confuse your right to travel with a non existent right of transportation.

Anonymous said...

There has been a total of 75 Planes Hijacked since 1950. I hardly think that we need TSA at all!

Anonymous said...

From the Texas STATE constitution:

"Sec. 9. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions, from all unreasonable seizures or searches, and no warrant to search any place, or to seize any person or thing, shall issue without describing them as near as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation."

From TSA (paraphrasing): "How do we get around this!?!"

Anonymous said...

I guess the TSA blogging team needs to read the 4th Amendment. Random searches are in direct violation of that amendment wich requires a search warrant or probable cause to conduct a search. I've never heard of random probable cause. Hmmmmm....

barry said...

If the TSA patdowns were done to people that were being chased by police, seeking to apprehend a criminal leaving the scene of the crime, anyone want to bet the ACLU would be all over the police for violating the criminal's rights?

Anonymous said...

'Those who sacrifice essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither and shall lose both. '

Benjamin Franklin

Lawrence C. said...

Good point - the Constitution is the law of the land, trumping states' rights, the courts, AND the TSA. So when the Fourth Amendment says that the people shall be secure in their persons and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures, the TSA is bound to respect it, whether you want to or not. Texas is simply standing up for the rights already granted to the people, which are being infringed upon by the federal government.
I'll be flying out of country soon from WA state, and when I do so, I'll take a Greyhound to Texas and depart from there. I shouldn't have to choose between being seen nude or being inappropriately touched, and I won't.

Anonymous said...

All of my points were made already by many others on this blog. But one thought sticks in my mind...we are actually paying for TSA to manipulate information, intimidate the public, violate the constitution, and tell us we're the problem.

What a country.

Anonymous said...

Only 898 complaints? No, only 898 folks willing to be put on TSA's "nail that sticks up" list. (As in the Japanese proverb, "The nail that sticks up gets hammered down")

Anonymous said...

Here's another complaint you can log! Your blog is nothing but lame propaganda. It's your best effort to gloss over the "fact" that the TSA is abusing Americans' rights. If the government listened to the people any more this practice would stop. Clearly the government has grown legs of its own and is no longer answerable to the people. Thanks for nothing. BTW, Americans are safer on airplanes these days because people will no longer stand by while some idiot runs up the isle on an airplane yelling "Alahu Akhbar!" Not because the federal gov't is spending billions "screaning passengers".

Anonymous said...

I'd rather die in a free society, than in live in a tyranny. The terrorist want to create a tyranny and the TSA is more than happy to oblige them.

If the TSA really want to preserve and protect a free America, they would stand down and allow people to opt out of their clammy little terror shakedowns at every airport in this great nation.

The TSA does more to destroy American Freedoms than the terrorist do. Why do you hate our troops TSA? Why do you engage every American to live inside a sphere of doom and paranoia? We will all die someday, I would rather die in freedom, than live in fear.

I used to fly 10-12 trips a year, now I drive because of the TSA, but soon I'm sure the TSA will start doing random terror searches on highways. The problem with Federal Agencies is they grow like cancer and when they aren't needed anymore they create new "problems" to solve.

TSA enjoy your moment, you will be history and just a punchline to a bad joke and that day will be here sooner than you can know. You can lock us up, you can destroy our lives, but you can not take away our civil rights, because they don't stem from the government. You can't take what you don't make.

TSA - remind me exactly how many terrorist you've caught in your security lines? Oh now I remember, its exactly ZERO, isn't it?

TSA - failing to keep America Safe for Nearly a Decade.

Anonymous said...

If one reviews the Constitution, specifically Article 1, section 8 in the light of the 10th Amendment, which was enacted later and therefore supersedes Article 1; one will find that there is NO police or internal security power allotted to the federal government. These powers are left to the states.

The TSA therefore being unconstitutional should be immediately dismantled, and the responsibility for airline security returned to the individual states and private airline companies.

To make my point more clear, this goes for the DEA and ATF as well. The FBI could continue to exist but only as a body that provides assistance upon request to local law enforcement agencies.

Anonymous said...

Feel free to raise your number of complaints to 900.
Go TEXAS! Fight the TSA propaganda!

Anonymous said...

The TSA's unwarranted searches without reasonable suspicion violates the 4th ammendment. Read it and get bent TSA. There is a reason the 4th ammendment was written. We are a free people and it was one of the first 10 garrantees of keeping the federal government in check. The TSA is way out of line and needs to be shut down.

RobW said...

The TSA is the creation of statists in our federal government. Airline security is business of the airlines, not the federal government. I pray for the day that the TSA is dissolved. Airlines who want to remain profitable and in-business will do a fine job in preventing acts of terror on their planes.

And appealing to the example of security measures taken around the world is an all-too-common disregard for American constitutionalism.

Jim Gaines said...

It's really sad when a government agency, after only a few years, becomes more detested than the IRS. Great accomplishment, to become the laughing stock of the country, and to try to defend these idiotic actions by the most general clause in the Constitution, while completely ignoring clear, concise, clauses that are blatantly against these actions. Quite pitiful, actually.

jay kelley said...

Make your complaints 900. I travel to Europe often and the American TSA is by far the most unprofessional of all.

Doing it because we can? That's just unAmerican.

IraqVet said...

To Anonymous who made the point that you can still be tracked even if you use Anonymous...that's a good point, that's why I want them to know who I am and I hope they will never forget...I do not fear them, its what they want and it is what they use against you is your own fear and you'll buy into anything they can dish up.

Anonymous said...

Way to go Texas. I sure hope many other follow your footsteps. The TSA infringment on my rights has gone on too long.

Anonymous said...

The 4th Amendmend protects us from unreasonable search and seizure, so unless you have reason to suspect a traveller of a crime it is unconstitutional to force them to subject to a search.
In other words, if you don't have reason to believe that I am a jihadi, "don't touch my junk."

Anonymous said...

It's sad that some people are willing to give up their rights a piece at a time because of the fear that potential terrorism has instilled in them. It is also sad that I have to give up the option to fly in order to prevent my rights and body from being infringed upon.

Anonymous said...

Like my Mother used to say, "Give them an inch they'll take a yard."

Anonymous said...

The bottom line is that the TSA must get a court order for each person to be searched, what is expected to be found, and stating the evidence to convince the judge that this search is necessary. If TSA cannot provide said proof, then they are not able to prosecute the search. Police can only search a person in connection to arrest. TSA employees are NOT sworn peace officers. They have no authority to force a person to be searched... you have to voluntarily give up your rights.

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry, I just don't fly anymore! It's not worth the stress, hassle and irritation. The TSA isn't the only agency that makes passengers upset, it's the British Airports Authority. A few years ago, they tried to enforce a one-bag carry on rule. It was beyond belief because every woman I know carries a handbag and many carry a laptop. Sorry, says the British goon, you have to check your laptop. I said, I'm sorry, no way! I vowed never to fly to LHR again until they changed this moronic policy. Now BAA forces all passengers to submit to the radiation box and they don't pat people down as you don't have a choice. Well, the UK was great for most of my life, but I'm not going there anymore until things change. And I won't fly in the US either until these policies are made reasonable and fair. Passenger profiling is the best method and may the PC crowd drop dead!

Crazy_Redneck said...

Just for commenting, we are now all on the no-fly list! lol.

Seriously, TSA? While the supremacy clause does state that federal law trumps state and local law, that only concerns the powers that are DELEGATED BY THE STATES (yes, we created you, not the other way around) to the federal government. Therefore, aviation safety is reserved to the states or the people. You have no standing with this silly little argument.

Apparently, you count on most people having less than an 8th grade education. For the most part, you'd be right...especially with your own employees.

FAIL!

Anonymous said...

I thought this was a joke. You've really got to be kidding me. The Supremacy clause? Would someone please hand Janet Napolitano a copy of the Federalist? The Supremacy clause only applies to specifically enumerated powers. Further, as Madison says, STATE laws are supreme in the areas which are NOT delegated to the Federal government, which is the far greater weight of power under our Federalist system. This means that the STATES are just as supreme as the Federal Government in the areas in which they have NOT delegated power

This post makes me ANGRY and sick, because it shows that the stooges running the show behind the TSA, as with other federal agencies, don't even understand the very Constitution that they are supposed to be upholding. SICK!

- An American Citizen and a FREE MAN

Anonymous said...

According to the federal government, the 'supremacy clause' and 'commerce clause' let them do anything they want. However, those are subject to AMENDMENTS, like the 4th and 10th.

Anonymous said...

Myth:

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.

Fact: The 4th Amendment has been abridged by the TSA.

Anonymous said...

So explain to me how Article VI, section 2 applies when the 4th Amendment does not?

Anonymous said...

Bump. I'd like a detailed reply on what this patriotic American is asking Bob.


You cite the supremacy clause of the constitution. I'm glad you brought the constitution into this.

What part of the constitution authorizes pat-downs, or the existence of the TSA at all? Just looked through Art. 1 sec. 8. Didn't find anything. Am I missing something?

Anonymous said...

Even if you have a legal leg to stand on that just means the laws should be changed. I have a right to travel, and I have a right not to be searched. The "Interstate Commerce" clause is a joke, if I object to government involvement in my travel am I supposed to walk across the country? Get off my back! The TSA is nothing but another branch of a government overstepping its bounds.

Anonymous said...

3%?!?! Such pompousness! My 16 year old daughter who is in school in Illinois and flies from Chicago to New York half a dozen times a year has been patted down every single time. She dreads going to the airport and it takes her a day to calm down from the experience.

Anonymous said...

For all of you that comment anonymously. They have your ip address. Its best to write your elected officials to complain there.

Tim Krakowski said...

Blogger Bob wrote:

Blogger 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

Translation: I'm a Big Government union bureaucrat. I don't work weekends.

Here's a new motto for you: TSA - violating your rights 24/7/365, but only lying M-F 11-3.

Anonymous said...

To all the people who think the 4th amendment argument isn't valid as we don't have a right to fly: the entire premise of the 4th amendment is that you are not subject to unreasonable searches and seizures at any time, regardless of your activity, be it walking down the street, driving your car, or riding an airplane.

Anonymous said...

The only kuddos I can give to the TSA is that they don't moderate their comments here unlike their threats and retaliation in the complaint department.

J. Peterson said...

This "pat-down" is simply a secure check that would be familiar to anyone working in any high-security enviroment would recognize. It's meant to ensure a "clean" environment for ALL individuals inside a sealed perimeter.They aren't catching anyone, because they get anything on that way any longer. The days of walking on with a weapon on you are OVER. Good. This is LONG overdue. I don't fly, but this screening of passengers is probably the ONLY positive thing about flying anyway. I just wished they spent more time on the aircraft itself, and the ground crews. I am more concerened about that than passengers on domestic flights. I'm happy to see the US come out of the Dark Ages on airline security, and join the rest of the world in trying to keep these nutbags off of airplanes so one doesn't fall on my house. Literally. It's a shame that people with an agenda that have nothing to do with society make life miserable for the entire planet. THAT is whom I reserve my anger for.

Anonymous said...

"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"

Effective at what? Name one potential disaster that TSA has prevented.

Joseph G. said...

In addition to Texas and Alaska, there are a number of airports in other states that are citing a portion of the law to opt out of the TSA and using private companies to conduct screening. Since these individuals don't work for the government, there is more that can be done to remove a screener who acts inappropriately.

Anonymous said...

Hello,
I'd just like to point out that, as a government sponsored organization, the TSA must be considered an agency of the federal gvernment and is thereby subject to the same restrictions
as the federal government, including the restrictions against unreasobable search; otherwise, it cannot make claim any federal authority, since both the restrictions and the authority are granted by the same document. By nullifying the document, the federal government nullifies itself and all powers of rule thus nullified return to the states.

Hambone said...

Blogger Bob:
Your non-contextual interpretation of the supremacy clause will cause you the same problems it caused the anti-gun crowd when things are all resolved. It will be that "made in Pursuance thereof" bit that will hose you. Just like when SCOTUS finally admitted that the 2nd Amnd. means what it says, they will also admit that Article. VI. Clause 2 means what the WHOLE clause says, as does the 10th Amnd.

Anonymous said...

Wow... just wow. What an incredibly brazen misreading of the Constitution to justify an abuse of people's rights. Hey, morons: if you're going to refer to the Constitution, perhaps maybe you should at least read the 4th and/or 10th Amendments, both of which clearly prohibit your actions. ... just saying.

There will be a day of reckoning, and when it comes, I hope they throw every single one of you thugs in jail for child molestation, among other things. Hiding behind "I was just following orders" didn't work for the guards at the Concentration Camps, or soldiers of other countries who abused their people, and I sure hope it doesn't work for any of you.

Michael said...

People who think invasive pat downs are really making their flight safer are somehow not connected with reality.

Fact: No way will anyone ever take over a flight like they did on 9/11. WE all know how to handle it now and in every case of someone acting up on a flight since 9/11 the passengers take control. It just isn't going to happen again no matter how hard they try.

Fact: Metal Detectors catch the guns and knives so those are out.

Fact: Bomb Sniffing dogs and luggage screening will catch an explosive of any consequence.

Fact: Profiling based on behavior and country of origin (not race, but country) works much better than "random" pat downs and screenings.

It's a flawed and unnecessarily invasive system we have now and it needs to go.

flyers unite! said...

Blogger Bob you don't seem to be garnishing much sympathy from your readers. Have you ever had a stranger touch your child or your wife inappropriately – in a way that angered you? And then have that stranger respond to your protests with self righteous defiance? I'm sure we all hope you never have the experience, but the mere idea might help you better understand the level of ire TSA is fomenting in the nation. (I wish I hadn’t already made my vacation plans for this summer. I guess I’ll be vacationing in the lone star state next year!)

Chris said...

I have met many kind and reasonable TSA agents while flying and I'm grateful for those people. However, this layman argumentative style is manipulative and absurd. Your "myths" are self created and exaggerated. The fact of the matter is your "enhanced" method of screening is completely ineffectual. It's aimed at finding contraband, not protecting people from terrorists. Nobody claims all children receive pat downs. When you make that claim it's easy to avoid the issue: we don't want our children being touched in intimate areas by complete strangers.

Anonymous said...

Don't mess with Texas.
I refuse to fly until this practice is Stopped.

hyrum.palmer said...

I recently flew through LAX on my way overseas where everyone, i repeat EVERYONE was put through the naked scanners. I am in the Army, often flying in uniform, using my military id, and even i am not trusted by the tsa. i dont think im any better than anyone else, but my government trusts me enough to employ me to defend this country and trusts me with millions of dollars worth of equipment and the lives of other men.

I do not believe that the tsa makes us any safer, it violates our civil liberties and every sense of decency. We have a military so that some can voluntarily sacrifice to secure the safety of others, but the tsa treats everyone like a criminal, everyone like a terrorist. The terrorists are winning because of the tsa. In the military it would be ludicrous for us to use the tsa's tactics, rather, we use our intelligence and training to judge a situation. perhaps the tsa could learn a lesson from this and tailor their services to meet real threats, rather than the children and genitalia of this country.

Anonymous said...

After opting out of the contraption which could heighten my cancer risk, I received a pat-down, as did my husband in front of our children. They dont let you touch your bags and act like you are a criminal if you do so. We had always intended to film on our phones if one of us had to go under, but we were separated like criminals, by TSA agents that were so intensely rude that it was beyond belief. To top it off, my husband is in law enforcement and had his badge on him. So dream on if you don't think people are offended or complaining. They just don't ask to whom they should complain. Also, thank you for making my 8 year old son cry on they way out of town for a vacation.

Anonymous said...

The first complaint I ever filed with TSA was about 8 years ago when my wife's wedding ring was stolen during screening. The process was frustrating. Filed complaints went unanswered, claims were not acknowledged one way or the other, follow-up phone calls lead to phone tags and being put on indefinite holds.

After several months of trying, I finally quit and accepted her wedding ring as a total uncompensated lost.

After that experience, I realized filing complaints with the TSA was a total waste of time and produced nothing.

Since then I've had three more incidents that could fit filing a formal complaint with TSA. One involved a humiliating and degrading pat search on my wife which invloved having her fully unzip her jeans and expose her panties in public (and this was before the enhanced pat-downs).

Another involved about $100 worth of damage to my property in a checked bag that TSA opened to hand screen and then haphazardly re-packed.

A third involved a search of my personal firearm which was properly declared and packed in checked baggage. After the proper initial search of that firearm, at some point after I walked off to my gate, TSA screeners violated thier own firearm search policy by breaking the lock and accessing the case again for another search without contacting me for the key and my prescence.

The humiliating search incident was handled with an in-person complaint to the supervisor on duty. It ended with a verbal apology and the supervisor didn't even ask for our names or personal info.

The damaged property was taken as a lost with no type of complaint filed. After the wedding ring circus, why bother?

I reported the firearm incident to the Port Police right there at the airport, but not to the TSA. I couldn't trust the TSA to handle my firearm properly to begin with, so how could I trust them fix it through a formal complaint? It was better being reported to real law enforcement authorities to deal with.

I have also written to my elected officials twice to express my concern on TSA conduct that I have witnessed and experienced, and asked them to seek changes.

So, as the Blog Team likes to do, let's look at these statistics. In the last eight years, I actually filed 5 TSA complaints:

3 were filed "ON the TSA."

2 were filed "WITH the TSA."

Of the 2 I filed WITH the TSA, only 1 was a formal complaint (the wedding ring incident). The other was an informal complaint with no paperwork attached.

But because the Blog Team only counts the number of "formal complaints" that are filed WITH the TSA in order to make thier cases on how well of a job they're doing, that means only 20% of my complaints counted for thier statistical purposes.

However, this article is only referring to pat search complaints. So with that, the TSA did not count any of my complaints even though in reality, I filed two---one informally with a TSA supervisor, and one to my congressman.

broken ladder said...

In this case, I'm with Texas. Since a certain event in 2001, air travel has been far too much of a hassle. It shouldn't be that way. You will never eliminate 100% of the risk of flying, and it is pointless to make travelers miserable by trying. Instead, keep the cockpit doors reinforced, and do the best you can with metal detectors and other resources that we've always relied on. Any economically rational traveller would prefer that to the current madness. The hysteria that fuels our current screening policy seems to be based on enriching companies that make technologies like backscatter x-ray machines. I see no indication that it's about actually making us safer.

Isamu Dyson said...

TSA is bluffing, Rep Simpson has already been addressed this issue.

This week he stated "Because the TSA's security measures are not the result of law, but of a TSA policy, Rep. Simpson believes the state law will override TSA policy."

There is no law directing screeners to fondle passengers breasts and genitals prior to entering the flight area.

Blogger Bob has his facts wrong as do many others when they cite Federal supremacy over state laws. While it is true that states cannot overturn Federal laws, marijuana use for example, there first needs to be a Federal law. Even so, Many states now have circumvented the Federal law through adjustments to their legislation.
These procedures are based on policy and do not have force of law, thus can be restricted by Texas, or any other state or local legislation that is enacted.

P J Munding said...

The State of Texas isn't trying to regulate the Federal Government, they are trying to hold a rouge organization (you the, TSA) accountable for breaking the law. We rebelled against the British government for a lot less than what your out-of-control agency is presently getting away with. I've flown Israel's El-Al airline and they have a very good record of keeping their planes safe without resorting to the immoral and offensive tactics used by the TSA. I'm ashamed to be an American when I see some of the disgusting things your organization has done to travelers. You humiliate and embarrass people without any sense of remorse.

Anonymous said...

Good. The taxpayers of Texas gave the airline industry the privilege of operating in our communities, and it - including the TSA - has been taking advantage of our hospitality since long before 911.

The current harassment strikes me as part of a 911 blame game the TSA and airline industry is still running on the average traveler. Abusive, lazy workers started to fall asleep at the switch in the late 1990's at the very airports used by the 911 attackers. I flew through them repeatedly up until just a few weeks before the attacks, and saw crowds of passengers waved in without going through metal detectors. At one of the airports, my large, lead-lined film bag set off the alarms and the TSA workers waved me on through. The lax security was starting to worry me so I offered to stop and open the bag. There was no rush because the airport was virtually empty at the time, and yet the TSA workers became angry with me for disturbing their conversation and started to gesture for a cop.

It’s not as if the TSA didn’t get the memo, because President Clinton spent the end of his second term playing Paul Revere warning about Al Qaeda attacking inside the U.S. And they need not blame me or the many others who likely sent letters to the FAA worrying about the lax security. But they did anyway, and it got so bad we had to make a law. You have to keep your hands off. Texas state law says so, and cellphone cameras will be rolling.

Anonymous said...

I never realized that Article 6 /2 allows for sexual assualt. Of course there is that pesky Amendment to the Constitution that says "Protection from unreasonable search and seizure."

Ok, I think I get the picture - it's for security reasons. As long as our Govt. keeps saying it's for security, no Amendment to our Constitution is safe.

Anonymous said...

Since when do the elitists in Washington care about the Constitution?

Well, didn't Al Gore say it was a "Living Breathing Document?"

Keep pushing. It works for in our favor.

Tastes Like Chicken said...

Fact vs. Fiction

Claim: "[L]ess than 3% of passengers receive pat-downs"

Fact: 252 million people screened by TSA

"Fact": *898 people filed a complaint regarding a TSA patdown (includes individuals who witnessed a patdown, and filed a complaint)

*898/x = .0004/100
x=# of TSA patdowns

89,800 = .0004x
89,800/.0004 = x
224,000,000 = x
Fact => TSA did *224 million pat-downs

Fact: TSA screened 252 million people.

*224,000,000/252,000000 = .89

=>Fact: Approximately *89% of people who were screened receive a pat-down. (TSA, however, said "less than 3% of passengers receive [a] pat-dow[n]").

Blogger Bob's "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%.

Anonymous said...

Fact vs. Fiction

Claim: "[L]ess than 3% of passengers receive pat-downs"

Fact: 252 million people screened by TSA

"Fact": *898 people filed a complaint regarding a TSA patdown (includes individuals who witnessed a patdown, and filed a complaint)

*898/x = .0004/100
x=# of TSA patdowns

89,800 = .0004x
89,800/.0004 = x
224,000,000 = x
Fact => TSA did *224 million pat-downs

Fact: TSA screened 252 million people.

*224,000,000/252,000000 = .89

=>Fact: Approximately *89% of people who were screened receive a pat-down. (TSA, however, said "less than 3% of passengers receive [a] pat-dow[n]").

Blogger Bob's "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%.

Anonymous said...

Constitutional law trumps congressional law. Illegal searches is prohibited by the constitution therefore giving the states the right to resist the TSA. Just so you know, the feds are not the highest ranked law enforcement officers. That would be a county sheriff. So yes, states trump feds if the feds are doing something illegal.

Robert Kertesz said...

Take flying lessons, become a private pilot, fly yourself and family. Have fun and circumvent the TSA hassel.
You don't have to show up 2 hours ahead of time, no more long lines to wait to get de-humanised by TSA, no more getting packed in like sardines into the plane, and you ALWAYS know who your other passengers are. Trips up to 300-400miles shuld not take any longer, and could be less expensive. It is also fun to learn this special skill.

Anonymous said...

This seems evil, as our overlords demand we bow to thier will. It is not about terror, it is a show. Any airport employee knows the truth, they could compromise our system with a swipe of and ID card. And we do not check bags under the plane. It is a show, a a sad show for Americans.

James or Jim said...

James - Longdrycreek Ranch, Texas Panhandle
I fly often enough to know I do not like lines or the ridiculous taking off shoes and belts and the like to appease the PC TSA crowd. Rather than you the sane approach of the State of Israel, Janet and John [Slow Draw] Pistole, a career fellow in the FBI, who arrived after the bomb went off rather than before, are making a mockery of the Constitution. The flying public finds these two faces offensive.

I find most of the TSA screeners friendly, and I joke with them. I laugh about what they do and they join in. Occasionally there is a sour puss in the group, but I figure that is Janet's or John's pick of potential TSA.

I just wonder why common sense rather than the imprisomment of US citizens is the goal of TSA? The concentration mentality is always in the mind of those who would want to screen for those who do not check their constitutional rights at the curb.

Anonymous said...

When tests are run on sneaking stuff past TSA the results are bad for TSA. Sneakers are always way to successful. So TSA fails their own tests and then tells us we are safe.

I want to see data on how many people are caught, convicted and spend time in jail. As far as I know not many.

In fact these procedures would not have had any affect on 911. They are all for show and to get a bigger budget.

Oh the Fed just granted US citizenship to known terrorists, will they be allowed to fly?

Anonymous said...

What about the 4th Amendment? You know that whole "unreasonable search and seizure" thing.

Do you think it is reasonable for the federal government to virtually molest a child in the name of faux "security?"

Anonymous said...

Add my complaint to your list. I've travelled extensively, been patted-down several times, and find this is outrageous!!!!

I believe my constitution protects me from unreasonable search and seizure. Where's your warrant?

TSA should spend more resources profiling the dangerous ones -- focus government resources on this - and leave my junk alone!

Anonymous said...

If you are going to 'hide behind' the founding document you should then know that "Article VI, Para 2' that the supremcey clause covers things 'in' the Constitution, not what you wish to believe it does - i.e. it does not cover every law you think up. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made 'IN' Pursuance thereof;"

"He who trades liberty for security deserves neither and will lose both."
— Thomas Jefferson

Anonymous said...

God Bless Texas!

I retired from the military defending the U.S. Constitution, and I am pleased to see that Texas has the character to stand up and also defend it. The TSA is an unauthorized entity performing illegal acts.

Thank you Texas, 49 more to go.

John said...

I do not envy the job of a TSA blogger. It has got to be supremely difficult to justify and defend, in good conscience, the policies and procedures of an organization such as this one. Hopefully, a new administration in 2012 will begin to severely limit the powers of the TSA, if not disband the organization completely. Yes, I know, that sounds like wishful thinking. Never-the-less, our history as a nation has shown that when the people of this great country have had enough of being repressed and having their liberties and freedoms trampled, they rise up in revolt. Just something to think about....have a wonderful day. :)

Julie Eileen Lantrip said...

To the less educated, using the Supremacy Clause sounds intimidating. Fact number one, the Bill of Rights was not given to the people by the government, we were born with these rights. Infact, it's the government's job to protect these rights. The government cannot ease, alter, change or modify these rights, period. Now there's the the Supremacy Clause in action.

Where in the US Constitution does it give the government the right to search and scan without probable cause, and without a warrant signed by a judge? What the TSA is getting away with is unconstitutional, and the States have every right to tell the FEDS to get back over the line, like it or not.

Anonymous said...

Nice try TSA, hiding behing the Supremacy Clause. Texas is protecting its citizens from unlawful searches. In addition to failing to produce any actionable evidence or intelligence with your "3% of travelers" search policy, you've exposed just how large a gap your SOP creates. Let's not forget also that TSA has no inherent right to a security presence within airports; there is no federal provision for such. Airports can opt to provide their own security screening.

Just added irony that the CAPTCHA for my post is "untru," just like the so called "facts" from the TSA.

Kenneth said...

Interesting how they use the Constituition in their defense when they totally ignore it in other ways.It is only useful when it agrees with a particular instance.

Anonymous said...

I haven't flown for 3 years because I refuse to deal with the TSA.

I drive everywhere I go and when I went to Europe last summer, I started it off by taking a road trip to canada, then flew from there.

I WILL NOT use american airports anymore.

Brian said...

As much as I hate to say it, flying is not a right.

On the flip side, if you want to teach the airlines and the TSA a valuable lesson, pick a month, any month and don't fly. Not one ticket, do all business by conference call / web-ex or other method, Don't take vacations etc. Leave the TSA with nothing but dignitaries and politicans to push around.

dbassd said...

I find your moderation to be highly objectionable. what is wrong someone may disagree with you? This is the 1st amendment that you are stepping on, and it sounds like there is more than just bad language that you are moderating. I will not be reading your writing anymore, and that is a fact, comrade

Anonymous said...

This article makes use of an interesting but unfortunate device called a "straw man". By inventing a "myth" and knocking it down the author hopes to give the reader a sense of the writer's superior knowledge and position. This is more appropriate in raw political venues and it is unfortunate that the TSA has the appearance of deceiving the uncritical reader.

Chris said...

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: 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.---------
uhhhhhh care to explain?

Anonymous said...

If I "pat down" a woman or child the way the TSA does, I'll be arrested before you can blink; the TSA gets away with it under the guise of safety? Please- just another example of governement abuse. Glad to see Texas has the cojones to say "Enough!".

Anonymous said...

That's a stretch to infer that an unconstitutional law has to be upheld by the states. Impeachment would be too good for this administration.

Chris said...

@ CJ Grisham, to be fair, you're wrong on all accounts. You're saying keeping the fed gov't from infringing yadayadayada, wellthat's regulating buddy. Second, you have a choice whether or not to fly, so they aren't forcing you to be searched. By buying your plane ticket, you are agreeing to a search. No infringements on rights whatsoever by TSA. Not that I agree with everything they do, but you guys gotta think logically.

Anonymous said...

It is well known when reporting crimes, sex crime is woefully under-reported due to the level of humiliation and shame felt by the victim. Another factor in reporting is the level of power that the perpetrator has over the victim. So, a government agency with guns and fiat power to confiscate property and restrict movement demands your compliance...there is no intimidation at all (sarc).

Anonymous said...

The TSA is simply an unAmerican organization created by illinformed bureaucrats to skirt the Constitution and curtail individual freedom. It does a good job spending tax dollars and accomplishes little in protecting America. How many terrorists has it caught while patting down passengers and forcing Grandmothers to take off their shoes?

Anonymous said...

If Texas bans the pat down, than no flights should be allowed out of Texas. This is more about prevention than catching.

Anonymous said...

Pistole says, "The pat-down doesn't touch the genitals."

Texas says, "Fine, we'll make the touching of the genitals during the pat-down illegal."

The TSA blog team says, "Well, that's not going to work."

Clearly, someone within the TSA is very confused.

Anonymous said...

The simple truth is that we, the people are the final arbitrators of what is is legal and illegal, constitutional or not.
This is our government. If we decide that the Feds are in the wrong, then they are in the wrong. Never forget that this is our country and we make the rules, not some bureaucratic para military organization like the TSA and Homeland Security.

Ron said...

Myth: The TSA works for the American People
Fact: The TSA works only to sustain itself and defend its police state tactics, all-the-while ignoring the will of the American People.
Myth: The TSA is above the constitution and the will of the people it works for
Fact: after the 2012 election if not before the TSA will be defunded and defanged. The Constitution will prevail - yeah even the 1st and 4th amendmends which the TSA sees as obstacles.

Anonymous said...

While I understand that TSA is organized under the DHS, I have to ask, Why then do TSA "agents" not take an Oath? According to Constitutional Law, all members of the government, and their assigns, are REQUIRED to have an Oath on file and backed by an affidavit. Yet, in speaking with a TSA "agent" she said they do NOT TAKE AN OATH! As such, they are impersonating a member/officer of government. How is that not illegal?

WonderHamster said...

As others have mentioned, the 9th, 10th, and 4th amendments (and the supremacy clause itself) throw your argument right out the window. Perhaps if the TSA showed more of an interest in actually following the constitution, we would find the TSA's constitutional arguments something other than laughable.

Of course the complaint rate is low. I would file a complaint every single time I fly, but don't relish spending several hours being threatened by bullies. I am curious, though, when your never ending lists will include every single person in the country.

And I really love this gem "our random, unpredictable security measures". You have inadvertently hit on a truth, at least partially. The TSA security policies are certainly random, but not terribly unpredictable. I can confidently predict that TSA policy will continue to expand into further violation of constitutional (and human) rights with every excuse that can be found. I am absolutely certain that the TSA will keep pushing to spend more money (with companies with connections to TSA heads) to violate our rights. I am pretty confident TSA policies will continue to catch exactly zero terrorists.

Thank you Texas representatives, for daring to finally say no.

Oh, and if these new scanners are so absolutely necessary, why is it that about half the time I go through Houston, the scanners are not being used? I thought these things were essential for our safety?

Tom Z said...

I would like to know exactly how many terrorists, or to be more exact, how many people seeking to do damage to an aircraft that the TSA has caught? Have there been any prosecutions to date? Please advise. Also, who is Blogger Bob? Is he a real person? The public would like to know.

Anonymous said...

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

You think Obama or his staff personally called for and directed this? They did not.

How did you feel about the massive erosion of rights and transparency that occurred under Bush? Under the direction of his cabinet and his staff. They started even before 9/11. 9/11 simply gave the Bush team the "Pearl harbor type" event they knew they needed as cover to their plans.

Anonymous said...

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

Oh. OH! I know the answer to that one!

To promote TSA propaganda.

Anonymous said...

I attempted to complain the last time I flew. I was threatened with being arrested.

I was pulled out of line for the metal detector, put in line for the scanner, tried to opt out of the scanner and was told that wasn't an option and was once again threatened with arrest.

After being forced to go through the scanner, I was detained for "further inspection" while my things were in open view. I requested I be able to grab the several thousand dollars' worth of equipment and was told no. When I was told I was to be patted down, I requested the agent change his gloves as I didn't know who or what he'd been touching before that. Once again, I was threatened with arrest.

That's why there aren't as many complaints as there should be. Even if people did complain, the response would be, in essence, "it's necessary". It's ludicrous.

Danger Boy said...

Excuse me, but if you wish to cite the Supremacy clause, I will simply cite the 4th Amendment, which is part of the same cherished document. Read it some time.

Anonymous said...

And President Obama just requested $76 million dollars more for more body scanners and TSA personnel. (Thank goodness his request was rejected.)

I wrote the White House and told him he just lost my vote. Maybe he doesn't care -- maybe TSA doesn't care. But this lunacy with the TSA is the number one issue on which I will base my vote in the next election. This madness has got to stop. The last time I checked, we were the land of the free and the home of the brave. I want to keep that for my children and grandchildren, not hand my freedom and dignity over to a sham government agency like TSA.

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."...
______________

I think that poster was using sarcasm. He was trotting out the bunk spewed by the TSA and using the ridiculousness of their arguments to make his point. I don't think anyone believes the radiation used in these airport body scanners is safe.

Anonymous said...

I love the "find another way to travel" argument. In the middle east, more people are killed with cars than airplanes. When will the government decide that the danger of car bombs is high enough to justify mandatory screenings for people before they get in their cars? "Do you want to drive today?"
I also find fault with the idea that government is to be trusted more than the citizenry. Because governments cannot be trusted, we wrote the Constitution.
I would also argue that the "liberty" piece of the Declaration of Independence includes the right to travel freely. While the Founding Fathers could not have conceived of automobiles and airplanes, they would have equated these modes of travel with riding in a horse and carriage. There is a difference between the right to operate a vehicle, and the right to occupy a vehicle. In either case, there are constraints, which are justifiable. My infant daughter rides in a car seat for her protection. I wear a seat-belt. Both of these are regulated by law. I'm fine with regulations as to who can drive, and who can operate aircraft. I'm even fine with regulations on passengers. Since we have the right to travel by whatever mode we choose, the whole argument of "find another way to travel" is negated.
So the question now boils down to what regulations will be placed on airline passengers, and who determines them. Since drivers' licenses, seat-belt laws, etc. are regulated by the states, it follows that regulations on who is allowed to fly be determined by the states. Not only is my state working within its rights, it is upholding my individual rights. How about this for a solution.
Any instance of government abuse of power, or inappropriate behavior touching of children by TSA agents - any at all - is unacceptable.
Furthermore, if my right to fly is based on a TSA agent's right to molest my child, then our society is screwed up eight ways from Sunday. Any infringement of our rights is a threat to our democracy, and will not be tolerated. At least one state still has the guts to do what needs to be done.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

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

that's pretty funny right there. I'm sure Mr Orwell is glad you saw his movie

Anonymous said...

mike k said...

"Why do we need pat downs at all? Make the airlines responsible for safety on their planes and problem solved."

To answer the question "why?"
Simple...SECURITY THEATRE!

Say the airlines have tonnes of stuff in the cargo hold that is NOT inspected by your friends at the TSA.
We can be sitting atop shoes, bottled water, shampoo and other dangerous items being shipped in the cargo hold.
It might be a goodthing to advise the TSA that many of the bottles have more than 4 oz.

RB said...

Chris said...
@ CJ Grisham, to be fair, you're wrong on all accounts. You're saying keeping the fed gov't from infringing yadayadayada, wellthat's regulating buddy. Second, you have a choice whether or not to fly, so they aren't forcing you to be searched. By buying your plane ticket, you are agreeing to a search. No infringements on rights whatsoever by TSA. Not that I agree with everything they do, but you guys gotta think logically.

May 16, 2011 7:56 AM

......................

Shouldn't the public know the limits to such a search before agreeing to such search?

TSA acts in secret which in itself goes against the beliefs of a free society.

What TSA is doing is clearly wrong. Read the TSA blog and see just how few people really support the TSA Stasi tactics.

Texas is only working to protect the citizens of Texas and I support that effort.

RB said...

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?

May 15, 2011 8:18 PM

..............
You are in a lonely place, eh?

RB said...

It is established that an unwarranted search of an automobile is not legal. Do you have a right to drive that automobile on public streets? No it is a privilege; but you do retain the right that prohibits unreasonable search of you and your property.

It is not legal to stop a person walking on the street and search their person. Do you have a right to walk on that street? No, but you are secure in your person.


May 15, 2011 8:55 PM

..............
Is it a privilege to be a passenger in that car? Operating a motor vehicle and riding as a passenger in an airplane are two separate issues. One requires under current law a permit showing proficiency to operate the vehicle.

No such standard exist to ride as a passenger, in a car or an airplane.

magnanamouse said...

The TSA is in the midst of a union-busting attempt by the right. Question who introduced the equipment and the policies that are now demonizing this vital part of our national security. All the anti-TSA venom is very purposely misplaced anti-union sentiment. The TSA is NOT at fault for following guiedlines handed down to them.

As for the organized managed profiles here with a poorly-constructed argument against the our government using the Supremacy Clause to douse the Texas GOP in cold water, it's Think Tank, Cato, Koch, Heritage nonsense. It will come out that all of these anti-union, anti TSA, anti-US Government lies will be outed as just that. Unfortunately, their swiftboat attack on reality will already be sold on the Tea Party rabid. Again, victims of this right-wing disgrace.

Anonymous said...

Go TEXAS! Defend us from this out of control agency.

Eric Scher said...

Article VI, Paragraph II of the US Constitution says the following:


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.


I draw your attention to the first 16 words of that paragraph:


This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;


As you can see, the Supremacy clause applies to the Constitution ITSELF and laws passed by Congress that are CONSTITUTIONAL. That is, laws that are passed in PURSUANCE of the limited and specific enumerated powers granted BY the Constitution.

It does NOT mean that ANY law passed by Congress is supreme, because if it did then there would be no need for Enumerated powers to begin with and in fact, the States would have been dissolved as of ratification in 1789 since their political authority had ceased to exist.

Anonymous said...

"We did not have these abuses of power under the Bush administration."

The Bush administration abuses were far worse.

Anonymous said...

Bob, what is with all this Obama bashing you are allowing?

You did not let this happen when Bush was your boss. Why now? Your prejudice showing?

Anonymous said...

"TSORon said.........
As for bomb components, we find them every hour of every day."

Every time you feed fear you serve our enemies.

Brent said...

"TSORon said.........
As for bomb components, we find them every hour of every day."
________________

Um, Ron, cell phone's don't count.

Anonymous said...

The tone of this "blog" is a perfect example of the typical TSA attitude..."screw you, we'll do what we want and there's nothing you can do about it" and then using slanted and intentionally misleading statistics to avoid addressing the root of the matter.

TRAVELERS: ****PLEASE FORMALLY REGISTER YOUR TSA COMPLAINTS**** even if nothing else happens at least the TSA can't continue to use this statistic to blow off suggestions or changes!

TSA: Most people are smart enough to realize your measures are ineffective and simply meant to create the ILLUSION of security vs ACTUAL security. Its time to take a hard look at your tactics when even the President's State of the Union address includes a joke about travelling by train to avoid TSA pat downs!

Bob [not the blogger] said...

Again, you are not forced to go through pre-board security, and, thus, when you do, your consent to a search is implied. Of course, if you refuse, you may not and cannot go on to fly. Boarding a private company's flight is not a Right.

So, there is no Fourth Amendment issue where there is implied consent.

Bob [not the blogger] said...

Somebody tell us where the constitutional issue is where there is consent to a search.

After all, nobody complains about the constitutionality of drunk checkpoints which you CAN avoid by going down a side street.

Nick Allen said...

Totally understand the patdown, within reasonable boundaries. May I ask, the delete meter to the right, at 10,000 plus, how does this compare to posts that make it live?

Very impressed that "clients" and "service users" now have a forum for discussing issues. Do you think that TSA services will take learnings and implement changes to speed up procedures, and improve the process?

Anonymous said...

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin

"Give me liberty or give me death!"

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Patrick_Henry

To keep my personal freedoms: Yes, I would rather fly without all the
scanners. True Americans are not scared of dying for our country.


Our sons and daughters are fighting and dying in foreign countries to protect our rights that we just blithely give up.

«Oldest ‹Older   401 – 600 of 1032   Newer› Newest»