[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Actor James Woods bashes Twitter after getting locked out

Handling an AGW (Armed Government Worker)

MICHAEL MOORE’S ANTI-TRUMP FILM BOMBS AT THE BOX OFFICE. THE NUMBERS ARE HORRIFIC

IDEN GAVE A LENGTHY ENDORSEMENT OF KAVANAUGH ACCUSER UNTIL ONE QUESTION CAUSED HIM TO WALK AWAY

Kavanaugh will use 1982 calendar to deny sex assault claims

Christine Blasey Ford’s Classmate (Quickly) Changes Her Tune

Criminal Charges for North Carolina Woman Who Sheltered Pets During Hurricane Florence

enate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years

Russian MoD Presents IL-20 Investigation Results - Israel "Crossed The Line Of Civilized Relations"

We need to talk frankly about our rapid population growth in Africa if we want to beat poverty

Beto O’Rourke: “I Did Not Try To Leave The Scene Of The Accident”

LMFAO 🤣WHEN TRUMPS SPEAKS WE ALL LISTEN ... THIS JIVE A$$ TALKING TURKEY SHADY FOOL IS NOW A HAS BEEN FROM HOPE - CHANGE --- TO NOPE - DERANGED!

BREAKING: Christine Blasey Ford's Female Witness Doesn't Remember Anything

Ron Paul Tells Truth On Syria - Immediately Smeared

Ron Paul Tells Truth On Syria - Immediately Smeared

Ron Paul Tells Truth On Syria - Immediately Smeared

Medea Benjamin Shows America What Real Resistance Looks Like (consistently non-interventionist)

Former Trump Aide Jason Miller Accused of Secretly Administering Abortion Pill

Alex Jones “I’m Ready to Die” - Exclusive Interview After Being Banned

The White House is considering an antitrust investigation into 'online platform bias' at Google and Facebook — read the leaked document here

PayPal Cuts Off Alex Jones’s Infowars

Rosenstein suggested he secretly record Trump and discussed 25th amendment

Chelsea Clinton’s Abortion Claim Sounds Like Something Hitler Might’ve Said

Why Are We in Media Hell?

Trump's "Opposition" Supports All His Evil Agendas While Attacking Fake Nonsense

What Democrats Have Become; Brett Kavanaugh is a casualty of an anything-goes political resistance.

BREAKING: FORMER SCALIA LAW CLERK Drops Pictures and Evidence That Blows Christine Ford’s Case Wide Open

President Trump to North Carolina resident: 'At least you got a nice boat out of the deal'

Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War

Former Admitted Groper Cory Booker Says, ‘It Would Be Irresponsible Not To’ Consider 2020 Presidential Run

Laugh of the Day

Three Cheers for Price Gouging During Hurricane Florence

FEMA: Trump administration will send ‘presidential alerts’ to cellphones across America

Young Christine Blasey Ford remembered as popular figure in Dewey Beach bar scene in 1980's

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford's team lays out terms it wants for potential Senate interview, sources say

Are Social Media Companies Banning Because Of What Happens In "Real World"? (Face to Face, not online)

COURT DOCUMENTS: Sherrod Brown’s Ex-Wife Accused Him of Assaulting Her

Trump advised Spain to build wall across Sahara to stop migrants

Republicans may 'compel' testimony from Fusion GPS researcher Nellie Ohr, ex-FBI official James Baker

Pope Francis says the devil is causing people to question the Catholic Church

'Family Values' Senator(R) Sentenced to 15 Years for Child Sex Trafficking and Child Porn

Beto O’Rourke to Black American: Illegal Immigrant Labor Needed for Cotton Gin

Kavanaugh Accuser’s Classmate Backs Off Claim She Heard About Alleged Assault

Grassley Ltr to Feinstein Re UNREDACTED Ltr of Christine Blasey Ford (19 Sep 2018)

Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, Warner Write Letter to Rosenstein, Wray Demanding They Withstand Pressure to Violate DOJ and FBI Norms

Huh. Democrats really don’t want those Carter Page FISA docs released

BOMBSHELL: Comey’s FBI said to have kept TWO sets of records regarding ‘Spygate’ operation

FBI, Justice Dept plan to redact Russia documents despite Trump order for full declassification: report

Ex-CIA Chief John Brennan Encourages Deep State to Defy President Trump’s Declassification Order

The SOBs got to Norm Macdonald


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

LEFT WING LOONS
See other LEFT WING LOONS Articles

Title: WHY CAN’T WE SUE THE TSA FOR ASSAULT?
Source: Daily Sheeple
URL Source: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/why- ... sue-the-tsa-for-assault_062018
Published: Jun 20, 2018
Author: Dr. Ron Paul
Post Date: 2018-06-20 11:28:25 by IbJensen
Keywords: None
Views: 98
Comments: 4

When I was in Congress and had to regularly fly between DC and Texas, I was routinely subjected to invasive “pat-downs” (physical assaults) by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). One time, exasperated with the constant insults to my privacy and dignity, I asked a TSA agent if he was proud to assault innocent Americans for a living.

I thought of this incident after learning that the TSA has been compiling a “troublesome passengers” list. The list includes those who have engaged in conduct judged to be “offensive and without legal justification” or disruptive of the “safe and effective completion of screening.” Libertarian journalist James Bovard recently pointed out that any woman who pushed a screener’s hands away from her breasts could be accused of disrupting the “safe and effective completion of screening.” Passengers like me who have expressed offense at TSA screeners are likely on the troublesome passengers list.

Perhaps airline passengers should start keeping a list of troublesome TSA agents. The list could include those who forced nursing mothers to drink their own breast milk, those who forced sick passengers to dispose of cough medicine, and those who forced women they found attractive to go through a body scanner multiple times. The list would certainly include the agents who confiscated a wheelchair-bound three-year-old’s beloved stuffed lamb at an airport and threatened to subject her to a pat-down. The girl, who was at the airport with her family to take a trip to Disney World, was filmed crying that she no longer wanted to go to Disney World.

The TSA is effective at violating our liberty, but it is ineffective at protecting our security. Last year, the TSA’s parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), conducted undercover tests of the TSA’s ability or detect security threats at airports across the country. The results showed the TSA staff and equipment failed to uncover threats 80 percent of the time. This is not the first time the TSA has been revealed to be incompetent. An earlier DHS study fund TSA screenings and even the invasive pat-downs were utterly ineffective at finding hidden weapons.

The TSA’s “security theater” of treating every passenger as a criminal suspect while doing nothing to stop real threats is a rational response to the incentives the TSA faces as a government agency. If the TSA puts up an appearance of diligently working to prevent another 9/11 by inconveniencing and even assaulting as many travelers as possible, Congress will assume the agency is doing its job and keep increasing the TSA’s budget. Because the TSA gets its revenue from Congress, not from airline passengers, the agency has no reason to concern itself with customer satisfaction and feels free to harass and assault people, as well as to make lists of people who stand up for their rights.

Congress should end the TSA’s monopoly on security by abolishing the agency and returning responsibility for security to the airlines. The airline companies can contract with private firms that provide real security without treating every passenger as a criminal suspect. A private security firm that assaults its customers while failing to detect real dangers would soon go out of business, whereas the TSA would likely have its budget and power increased if there was another attack on the US.

If shutting down the TSA is too “radical” a step, Congress should at least allow individuals to sue TSA agents for assault. Anyone who has suffered unfair treatment by the TSA as a result of being put on the “troublesome passengers” list should also be able to seek redress in court. Making TSA agents subject to the rule of law is an important step toward protecting our liberty and security.


Poster Comment:

What we have here is a boiler with a defective safety valve and that bitch is running on high heat... with more coal being tossed on every day. How long before something pops?

Personally I kinda wanna see it. I want to see the expressions on their faces when they try to trade their bank cards or some bitcoin for a loaf of bread. Even funnier if they use gold. Who eats gold?

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: IbJensen (#0)

"WHY CAN’T WE SUE THE TSA FOR ASSAULT?"

Because you voluntarily submit to their searches. If you don't want to be searched, simply leave the facility.

Stop your whining and your histrionics.

misterwhite  posted on  2018-06-20   22:06:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: misterwhite (#1)

If you don't want to be searched, simply leave the facility [where federal inspectors are authorized to perform their respective duties.]

What makes you so sure there is any individual liberty to do so?

buckeroo  posted on  2018-06-20   22:36:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: misterwhite (#1)

You are dumb or a liar. Maybe both.

A K A Stone  posted on  2018-06-21   7:39:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: IbJensen, A K A Stone, misterwhite (#0)

"WHY CAN’T WE SUE THE TSA FOR ASSAULT?"

People and and have sued the TSA for violation of constitutional rights. They have lost.

At issued is the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches.

The Courts have fond the searches to be reasonable.

The "searches are valid only if they recognize the right of a person to avoid search by electing not to board the aircraft.”

See e.g. USA v Marquez, 04-30243 (9th Cir, 7 Jun 2005).

At 6509:

A

[1] Airport screenings of passengers and their baggage constitute administrative searches and are subject to the limitations of the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908 (9th Cir. 1973) (noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are “conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme” where the essential administrative purpose is “to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft”); see also id. at 895, 904. Thus, airport screenings must be reasonable. See Torbet v. United Airlines, Inc., 298 F.3d 1087, 1089 (9th Cir. 2002). To judge reasonableness, it is necessary to balance the right to be free of intrusion with “society’s interest in safe air travel.” United States v. Pulido-Baquerizo, 800 F.2d 899, 901 (9th Cir. 1986).

B

[2] In Davis and its progeny, we have established a general reasonableness test for airport screenings. “An airport screening search is reasonable if: (1) it is no more extensive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives; (2) it is confined in good faith to that purpose; and (3) passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.” Torbet, 298 F.3d at 1089 (citation omitted); see also Davis, 482 F.2d at 913; Pulido-Baquerizo, 800 F.2d at 901.

The cited Davis is United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908 (9th Cir. 1973) (noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are “conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme” where the essential administrative purpose is “to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft”)

At 6512:

3

Finally, “airport screening searches are valid only if they recognize the right of a person to avoid search by electing not to board the aircraft.” Davis, 482 F.2d at 910-11; see also id. at 913. However, a passenger must exercise his right to abandon air travel before beginning the screening procedures. See Pulido-Baquerizo, 800 F.2d at 902 (“The requirement in Davis of allowing passengers to avoid the search by electing not to fly does not extend to a passenger who has already submitted his luggage for an x-ray scan.”). Any other rule would allow potential hijackers to leave whenever detection seemed imminent and permit them to try again another day. Id. (“A rule allowing a passenger to leave without a search after an inconclusive [screening] would encourage airline terrorism by providing a secure exit where detection was threatened.”).

nolu chan  posted on  2018-06-21   9:09:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com