The Obama Approved (Nazi)TSA sexual assault of former Miss USA

[thereisnospoon]

Where did I say that, first of all? Secondly, they do consent by flying but the court ruled the constitutionality of the search is not even dependent upon it.

If you consent by flying you can revoke that consent by deciding not to fly. That is how implied consent works in the real world, which is why police cannot force you to take an DUI test without a warrant. You have the option of revoking your consent by surrendering your license.

If you were not one of the ones that made that particular argument I apologize, it seems to be that everyone thinks that clinches the defense of the searches, and I cannot remember exactly who has said it when so many people do.

Actually the court ruled, if you bothered to read my link, that the search at that point no longer required consent even though a passenger at the last minute tried to elect not to fly...

Defendant went into the security line at the Honolulu airport, but it was noted on his boarding pass that he presented "No ID" to get through security. He was accordingly selected for secondary screening, although he was protesting that his flight was about to leave, which it was. A handheld wand went off on a front pants pocket three times, and he protested that he had nothing in his pocket. The TSA officer used the back of his hand to feel what might be setting off the alarm on the wand, and something was in there but he could not tell what it was. Defendant at that point asked to leave the airport because he changed his mind about flying. The TSA officer told him to empty his pockets, and a meth pipe was found in the front pocket. A further search of his person revealed meth. The Ninth Circuit held that airport searches no longer are dependent upon implied consent; they are now administrative searches because flying on an airplane in a post-9/11 world is now the same as a "highly regulated industry." Any "implied consent," thus, cannot be revoked once the passenger elects to enter the secure area. Such searches, however, are not limitless; they are limited by their justification: screening for terrorists. This search was reasonable under the circumstances. United States v. Aukai, 497 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc):

The 9th "Circus" has been overturned more times than all other circuits combined.

 

[TheBrain]

Which invalidates your argument that people consent to the search by flying.

Where did I say that, first of all? Secondly, they do consent by flying but the court ruled the constitutionality of the search is not even dependent upon it.

If you consent by flying you can revoke that consent by deciding not to fly. That is how implied consent works in the real world, which is why police cannot force you to take an DUI test without a warrant. You have the option of revoking your consent by surrendering your license.

If you were not one of the ones that made that particular argument I apologize, it seems to be that everyone thinks that clinches the defense of the searches, and I cannot remember exactly who has said it when so many people do.

What? In the real world if you are arrested for suspicion of DUI and you refuse to take a breathalyzer that is in fact implied consent, and you are arrested on the spot for DUI. In fact in some states it is an additional crime to refuse to take the breathalyzer, and all of it is constitutional.

 

[xsited1]

Where did I say that, first of all? Secondly, they do consent by flying but the court ruled the constitutionality of the search is not even dependent upon it.

If you consent by flying you can revoke that consent by deciding not to fly. That is how implied consent works in the real world, which is why police cannot force you to take an DUI test without a warrant. You have the option of revoking your consent by surrendering your license.

If you were not one of the ones that made that particular argument I apologize, it seems to be that everyone thinks that clinches the defense of the searches, and I cannot remember exactly who has said it when so many people do.

What? In the real world if you are arrested for suspicion of DUI and you refuse to take a breathalyzer that is in fact implied consent, and you are arrested on the spot for DUI. In fact in some states it is an additional crime to refuse to take the breathalyzer, and all of it is constitutional.

It's so funny when people fling around the term "Constitutional." There are a whole host of problems with the breathalyzer test, yet somehow a few politicians got laws passed and claim "it's Constitutional now!"

The threat our nation is not going to be Al Qaeda or the Communists or the Mexicans. It has always been, throughout history, internal. The people who allow the overreach of government are the problem.

 

[TheBrain]

If you consent by flying you can revoke that consent by deciding not to fly. That is how implied consent works in the real world, which is why police cannot force you to take an DUI test without a warrant. You have the option of revoking your consent by surrendering your license.

If you were not one of the ones that made that particular argument I apologize, it seems to be that everyone thinks that clinches the defense of the searches, and I cannot remember exactly who has said it when so many people do.

What? In the real world if you are arrested for suspicion of DUI and you refuse to take a breathalyzer that is in fact implied consent, and you are arrested on the spot for DUI. In fact in some states it is an additional crime to refuse to take the breathalyzer, and all of it is constitutional.

It's so funny when people fling around the term "Constitutional." There are a whole host of problems with the breathalyzer test, yet somehow a few politicians got laws passed and claim "it's Constitutional now!"

The threat our nation is not going to be Al Qaeda or the Communists or the Mexicans. It has always been, throughout history, internal. The people who allow the overreach of government are the problem.

Meh, 99.99% of the time if you are asked to take a breathalyzer it is b/c you are in fact driving drunk. Frankly , I'm not too concerned about the Constitutional rights of drunk drivers.

 

[Spoonman]

if you're so worried about being patted down by the tsa, next time you have to fly don't take a shower for a week. they'll leave you alone

 

[Spoonman]

or if you're a chick and you are worried about a pat down, slip a roll of quarters down your panties and watct those TSA agents run for the hills

 

[TheBrain]

or if you're a chick and you are worried about a pat down, slip a roll of quarters down your panties and watct those TSA agents run for the hills

Or shut up and walk through the scanner like 99% of the population successfully does with no problems.

 

[Grace]

or if you're a chick and you are worried about a pat down, slip a roll of quarters down your panties and watct those TSA agents run for the hills

 

[Spoonman]

or if you're a chick and you are worried about a pat down, slip a roll of quarters down your panties and watct those TSA agents run for the hills

Or shut up and walk through the scanner like 99% of the population successfully does with no problems.

you have no imagination

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Now I can understand the fact that seraching a child but let's say they stop searching all together what do you think would happen....then when it dous everyone will blame the government and say why didn't you search them before they got on the plane...if you feel so bad about them doing it have someone video tape them searching you then if it's to intense file a charge. Its not that big of a deal...or you can do what my buddy did when he was searched he told them if they grabed his junk longer then 2 secs he was going to punch them...well it worked but it all depends on what kind of person you are.

Can you give me a list of all the people who blamed the government for 9/11?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Where did I say that, first of all? Secondly, they do consent by flying but the court ruled the constitutionality of the search is not even dependent upon it.

If you consent by flying you can revoke that consent by deciding not to fly. That is how implied consent works in the real world, which is why police cannot force you to take an DUI test without a warrant. You have the option of revoking your consent by surrendering your license.

If you were not one of the ones that made that particular argument I apologize, it seems to be that everyone thinks that clinches the defense of the searches, and I cannot remember exactly who has said it when so many people do.

What? In the real world if you are arrested for suspicion of DUI and you refuse to take a breathalyzer that is in fact implied consent, and you are arrested on the spot for DUI. In fact in some states it is an additional crime to refuse to take the breathalyzer, and all of it is constitutional.

I never said you would not be arrested, just that you can refuse the breathalyzer. It is not a crime to refuse to take a breathalyzer, that is covered by the 5th Amendment. Most, if not all, states will take away your license if you refuse the breathalyzer, but it is perfectly legal to do so.

 

[TheBrain]

If you consent by flying you can revoke that consent by deciding not to fly. That is how implied consent works in the real world, which is why police cannot force you to take an DUI test without a warrant. You have the option of revoking your consent by surrendering your license.

If you were not one of the ones that made that particular argument I apologize, it seems to be that everyone thinks that clinches the defense of the searches, and I cannot remember exactly who has said it when so many people do.

What? In the real world if you are arrested for suspicion of DUI and you refuse to take a breathalyzer that is in fact implied consent, and you are arrested on the spot for DUI. In fact in some states it is an additional crime to refuse to take the breathalyzer, and all of it is constitutional.

I never said you would not be arrested, just that you can refuse the breathalyzer. It is not a crime to refuse to take a breathalyzer, that is covered by the 5th Amendment. Most, if not all, states will take away your license if you refuse the breathalyzer, but it is perfectly legal to do so.

you are once again WRONG

In some states, it is actually considered a crime to refuse to take a breathalyzer test when you have been stopped on suspicion of drunk driving. This may also mean that you go to jail, period!

Refuse Breathalyzer, Breathalyzer, Interlock, DUI Arrest, Sobriety Test

 

[Contumacious]

Which invalidates your argument that people consent to the search by flying.

Where did I say that, first of all? Secondly, they do consent by flying but the court ruled the constitutionality of the search is not even dependent upon it.

If you consent by flying you can revoke that consent by deciding not to fly. That is how implied consent works in the real world, which is why police cannot force you to take an DUI test without a warrant. You have the option of revoking your consent by surrendering your license.

.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. —

.

 

[Contumacious]

How much is TSA paying per hour nowadays?

.

I hope I see you in an airport someday crying and moaning because you're scared of the big bad X ray machine and being subjected to the "sexual assault" of a pat down, so I can point and laugh as I breeze through the X Ray and go on my merry way. That would make me laugh.

it is people like you, the complicit ones. The ones who are willing to knuckle under to an all powerful central government. You are 100% pro -security without freedom.
Nearly 230 years ago a group of very wise men drew up a document that made the infant nation known as the United States of America a unique experiment in freedom and liberty. No other nation in existence acknowledged that liberty to all people is inherent from birth. That document known as the United States Constitution indicated that human rights were God given and not granted by government. These great men believed and affirmed that government should fear the people, not the other way around.
People like you wish to turn that on it's head. You want government to control your lives. You consider all people useless without the constant oversight of government.
Authoritarian people in government count on your fear and wailing for protection to enact restrictive policies and laws. It is because people like you are willing to put with police state-like rules and laws that our freedom and liberties are being slowly eroded away.
If you like absolute security so much, why do you live here in the US?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What? In the real world if you are arrested for suspicion of DUI and you refuse to take a breathalyzer that is in fact implied consent, and you are arrested on the spot for DUI. In fact in some states it is an additional crime to refuse to take the breathalyzer, and all of it is constitutional.

I never said you would not be arrested, just that you can refuse the breathalyzer. It is not a crime to refuse to take a breathalyzer, that is covered by the 5th Amendment. Most, if not all, states will take away your license if you refuse the breathalyzer, but it is perfectly legal to do so.

you are once again WRONG

In some states, it is actually considered a crime to refuse to take a breathalyzer test when you have been stopped on suspicion of drunk driving. This may also mean that you go to jail, period!

Refuse Breathalyzer, Breathalyzer, Interlock, DUI Arrest, Sobriety Test

From your link.

In most states, refusing to submit to a breathalyzer test can lead to serious criminal consequences. If a jury trial is held for a DUI case, most states allow that information to be introduced to the jury. The jury is instructed to draw a permissible inference of “consciousness of guilt”. These laws differ from state to state; in Massachusetts and Delaware, for example, no mention of this refusal may be introduced into a courtroom hearing. A DUI suspect’s refusal to submit to a breathalyzer test or other field sobriety tests may result in the automatic suspension of one’s driver’s license even if not convicted of drunk driving. Refusing to submit to these tests may also increase the penalties for any convictions. In some states, it is actually considered a crime to refuse to take a breathalyzer test when you have been stopped on suspicion of drunk driving. This may also mean that you go to jail, period!

They can introduce the evidence that you refused to take a breathalyzer as evidence of guilt. They can even take away your license for refusing to take it, or use the fact that you refused to take it to enhance your sentence.

You cannot, however, be charged with a crime for not taking the test.

From the Constitution.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

Want to try again?

 

[HenryBHough]

Were Moochelle so thoroughly groped before boarding Air Farce One so much time would be consumed that the destination golf game woult start without His Royal Highness!

But not to worry; royalty is exempt from this crap.

 

[Wildman]

wah, I was Miss USA I should be treated differently. I flew last month, I got patted down once, the TSA touched my balls a few times through my clothes. BIg fucking deal, I'm an adult I can handle an accidental grope.

in other words, you enjoyed getting the "FEEEELING"

you perverts are all the same, i'll bet if you pass through the same TSA you will request he feel you up, only with more emphasis