TSA Stupidity

10:04 am EST November 16th, 2010 | News | 19 Comments

I haven’t been paying super close attention to this made-up media story around the TSA, but are people aware that flying on an airplane isn’t a constitutional right? Go through the scanner or get the pat down, or buy a train/bus ticket or rent a car. Seems clear cut to me.

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
«
»

19 Responses to “TSA Stupidity”

  1. Got My Irish Up says:
    November 16, 2010 at 10:20 am

    are people aware that flying on an airplane isn’t a constitutional right?

    Sure. The same way they are aware that abortion isn’t a constitutional right, or that health insurance isn’t a constitutional right, or that same-sex marriage isn’t a constitutional right.

    Or that keeping and bearing firearms is constitutional right. Or that 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.

    If we’re going to be constitutionally serious, let’s be serious. And if we’re going to be flip, let’s disable the comments for this post.

  2. August J. Pollak says:
    November 16, 2010 at 10:21 am

    but are people aware that flying on an airplane isn’t a constitutional right?

    Are blog owners aware that not being subjected to unreasonable searches by the government is?

  3. Marco21 says:
    November 16, 2010 at 10:47 am

    My only TSA problems were when they were shaking down my 75 year-old mom in a wheel chair. Really? Other than that, I’ve never had a problem. I guess it’s because I don’t load a carry-on with my closet for a three-day trip like most of America.

  4. Ol Froth says:
    November 16, 2010 at 12:01 pm

    In the case at hand, the guy decided that he’d rather not fly if being subjected to an intrusive search was a condition of travel. And he’s persued by TSA officials who tell him “Be groped or else.”

  5. Sean D. Martin says:
    November 16, 2010 at 12:47 pm

    What August said.

    Seriously, Oliver. Are you really intending to argue that the TSA’s methods are effective and, more importantly, that US citizens should just happily go along because the gov’t says they should?

    There have been those, of course, who take a “I have a right to fly! You don’t ever get to touch me!” approach and they are, of course, overstating it and wrong. But most of the complaints and comments I’ve seen have been folks who don’t want to go through an overly intrusive and ineffective charade. They aren’t claiming they have a god given right to air travel and aren’t opposed to reasonable and effective security measures.

    Telling the public that either a full body scan or pat down are required to assure security when it just isn’t true is not reasonable or effective. Telling someone who refuses to submit to either that they will be fined rather than just not allowed past the checkpoint should be intolerable to someone who supports civil rights.

  6. Buzz Killington says:
    November 16, 2010 at 12:52 pm

    Ironic, coming from a man who gets paid to complain.

  7. wiz says:
    November 16, 2010 at 12:53 pm

    The problem is (will always be) what constitutes an ‘unreasonable’ search, and how do you avoid that and still get to an ‘effective’ search?

    Of course, some customers are whiners, and some security techs are dicks;
    add a dash of ego on both sides (‘how dare you insinuate I’m a threat’/'I am the law, respect my A-thor-A-Ti’) and sure enough, the drama begins….

  8. tim says:
    November 16, 2010 at 1:12 pm

    Oliver, I could not disagree with you more.

    Think about this from the perspective of:
    - Children
    - Teens starting to go through puberty
    - rape survivors

    Now, even when choosing to go through the scanner, there are reasons they will still decide to give you the pat-down. One incident involved a child who moved too much – I suspect this would happen rather frequently.

    This is a large country. For many people simply wanting to visit relatives over the holidays, cars or trains are not an option (especially considering how little vacation time most people get).

  9. levtolstoy says:
    November 16, 2010 at 3:11 pm

    1) Why do you call this a “made-up media story?” The TSA has instituted new policies. A substantial number of passengers (and security experts, for what it’s worth) have been skeptical of/outraged by the TSA’s policies in the past, and they were especially upset about this decision. The media then reported on the change in policy as well as the objections that were being made. Seems like a legit story to me.

    2)”… are people aware that flying on an airplane isn’t a constitutional right?” Is the author of this post aware of a little thing called the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution? It states: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” According to your conception of the Constitution, there would be nothing to complain about if the government set up a checkpoint right outside of your door and required you to submit to a full body cavity every time you wanted to leave your house. After all, I don’t see a right to leave your house anywhere in the Constitution.

    If by “constitutional right” you mean “enumerated right,” then your statement would be technically correct but completely irrelevant. There is no fundamental difference between an enumerated right (such as the right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures, which you’ve conveniently ignored) and an unenumerated right such as the right to travel without undue, arbitrary, and unreasonable government restrictions, which has been upheld by many courts many times. If you’d like citations I would be happy to provide them.

    3) I agree– Albert Haynesworth is pathetic.

  10. Sean D. Martin says:
    November 16, 2010 at 3:27 pm

    Really, Oliver. I don’t think I’ve seen a post where you’ve been more off base. If it were April 1st I’d think you were deliberately trying to act like a right wingnut.

    ” … or buy a train/bus ticket or rent a car. Seems clear cut to me.”

    Yeah. If they want to serve so much, let the gays sign up for the Peace Corps. And there’s no reason that black fella had to take the direct route through this neighborhood when alternate routes are available. Seems clear cut to me.

    If they don’t have bread, let ‘em eat cake.

  11. Burn says:
    November 16, 2010 at 5:32 pm

    Just wait until it’s your balls that are fondled in line, oliver.

    Then you’ll think differently.

    Fuck it, it’s over. The terrorists have won.

  12. tim says:
    November 16, 2010 at 6:22 pm

    The terrorists have won.

    Nah, nobody has won. Except maybe the CEO of the company that produces the new scanning machines.

  13. Sean D. Martin says:
    November 16, 2010 at 7:15 pm

    Yeah, the motivation for using full body scanners is all to keep you safe. Youbetcha.

    * 2005: Michael Chertoff, as head of Homeland Security, orders the first batch of porno scanners from a company called Rapiscan Systems. After his departure, Chertoff gave dozens of interviews using his government credentials to promote the device. What he didn’t tell people was that Rapiscan was one of the clients of his consulting company, The Chertoff group.
    * March 2009: The Department of Homeland Security says they will apply $1 billion in stimulus money to the nation’s airports. Senator Joe Lieberman, Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, personally promises to oversee the distribution of stimulus funds so money goes toward the goal of creating “4 million jobs” and not on “boondoggles”
    * December 2009: Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz inserted language into the Homeland Security appropriations bill barring the use of full-body image scans as “primary” screening tools at airports, and it passed the House on a bipartisan vote of 310-118. Both the ACLU and the NRA backed it. The amendment also made it illegal to store and copy these images. It died in the Senate.
    * December 25, 2009: The “Christmas bomber” attempts to detonate plastic explosives hidden in his underwear while on board a flight to Detroit.
    * December 29, 2009: Joe Lieberman calls for “more widespread use of the full-body scanners after the aborted attack.”
    * January 2010: Since they couldn’t get money for the porno scanners from Congress, TSA uses the “Christmas bomber” scare to appropriate $25 million they had received in stimulus money to buy the “backscatter” scanners — from Rapiscan, Chertoff’s client. Rapiscan said the contract “helped create” 25 jobs. The government gives the TSA the green light to spend a total of $173 million on the scanners. TSA spokesperson Sarah Horowitz said “the agency has enough funds that would come from the stimulus program and other federal sources” to purchase 300 more porno scanners, per CNN. Total jobs created, per the government’s own website: 1.
    * April 2010: The GAO reports that “it remains unclear whether the AIT would have detected the weapon used in the December 2009 incident based on the preliminary information GAO has received.”
    * November 8, 2010: US Airline Pilots Association tells its members “NOT to submit to AIT screenings.”
    * November 15, 2010: Joe Lieberman says he “comes down on the side of the patdowns.”

    So the ex-head of Homeland Security throws business to one of his clients so we spend $173,000,000 on scanners that don’t add to security. But, hey, for that $173 mill we did get to create 1 job!

    Seems clear cut to me.

  14. Quaker in a Basement says:
    November 16, 2010 at 10:58 pm

    I’ve been practicing making little “eep!” sounds for the amusement of my fellow passengers.

  15. ottnott says:
    November 17, 2010 at 3:51 am

    I can excuse you for not “paying super close attention” to the story, but I can’t excuse your failure to put much thought into your response.

    Consider this version of what you wrote, with a few terms replaced by blank spaces:
    …are people aware that flying on an airplane isn’t a constitutional right? Go through the ________ or get the ________, or buy a train/bus ticket or rent a car. Seems clear cut to me.

    Your commenters are telling you that they care what TSA uses to fill in the blanks. You should, too.

    Your flippant “isn’t a constitutional right” dismissed any objections someone might have about TSA’s procedures. You may as well have written:
    “…are people aware that flying on an airplane isn’t a constitutional right? Go through the waterboard interrogation or get the full body-cavity search, or buy a train/bus ticket or rent a car. Seems clear cut to me.”

  16. fd10801 says:
    November 17, 2010 at 8:32 am

    You shouldn’t be so hard on Oliver; he’s just thinking like a modern liberal: “I have not the least bit of concern for people engaged in activities in which I do not participate.”
    That’s the thinking that drives liberals everywhere – especially in the White House.

  17. Sean D. Martin says:
    November 17, 2010 at 12:25 pm

    Frank: That’s the thinking that drives liberals everywhere

    You once once commented “And, of course, for Oliver, any Republican becomes all Republicans.”, suggesting you see a problem with generalizing.

    Several folks who you’ve previously claimed always follow Oliver posted comments in this very thread strongly disagreeing with him.

    Yet you still insist all-liberals-are-the-same-everywhere. Sad.

  18. Sean D. Martin says:
    November 17, 2010 at 12:28 pm

    Oliver -
    I assume you check out comments posted to your blog. Any further thoughts on TSA Stupidity? I’m curious as to whether the comments here have caused you to re-think at all, and if so, whether your view has changed.

  19. Sean D. Martin says:
    November 19, 2010 at 1:35 pm

    I guess no to both. Thanks!