Rand Paul detained by TSA

[LibertyForAll]

If I have to pay someone to transport me, then I should be subject to whatever restrictions, guidelines, etc., they choose to impose, unless said restrictions violate established law.

If I don't like said rules/regulations/guidelines, I am free to choose another mode of transport.

I do NOT have a constitutional right to travel with a particular company, or by a particular method.

What you describe here would be a free market system. This is not what we have. What we have is a government agency assuming they have probable cause to search every man, woman and child in america.

You are an idiot. There is no government airline co. They are private and publicly held corps that can choose to serve or not serve anyone they want. You have no more right to enter an airpalne that you do not own than try to enter My home.

Last I checked the airlines don't run the TSA.

 

[Katzndogz]

Of course obama sides with the TSA!

http://thehill.com/blogs/transporta...te-house-sides-with-tsa-in-rand-paul-standoff

The White House is standing by the Transportation Security Administration in its standoff with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his father, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

The elder Paul called the TSA a "police state" Monday after Rand Paul was reportedly detained by TSA after he refused to take a pat-down from TSA officials at the Nashville International Airport.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that he didn't have any reaction to Paul's "police state" comments.

But Carney sided with the TSA saying, "I think it is absolutely essential that we take necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe."

Who knows, in the world of liberal equality, Rand Paul might well be a terrorist!

This is an absolutely BRILLIANT move by the liberal regime.

 

[Jarhead]

If I have to pay someone to transport me, then I should be subject to whatever restrictions, guidelines, etc., they choose to impose, unless said restrictions violate established law.

If I don't like said rules/regulations/guidelines, I am free to choose another mode of transport.

I do NOT have a constitutional right to travel with a particular company, or by a particular method.

What you describe here would be a free market system. This is not what we have. What we have is a government agency assuming they have probable cause to search every man, woman and child in america.

You are an idiot. There is no government airline co. They are private and publicly held corps that can choose to serve or not serve anyone they want. You have no more right to enter an airpalne that you do not own than try to enter My home.

Your wife gave me carte blanche to enter your home anytime I want to.
FYI....you are running out of mouithwash.

 

[Conservative]

Transportation Security Administration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Private screening did not disappear under the TSA, which allows airports to opt out of federal screening and hire firms to do the job instead. Such firms must still get TSA approval under its Screening Partnership Program (SPP) and follow TSA procedures.[8] Among the U.S. airports with privately operated checkpoints are San Francisco International Airport; Kansas City International Airport; Greater Rochester International Airport; Tupelo Regional Airport; Key West International Airport; Charles M. Schulz – Sonoma County Airport; and Jackson Hole Airport.[9][10]

 

[Missourian]

Your right to privacy is not being violated. Flying is a voluntary act, and if you decide to not be searched, you are not arrested. You can turn around and walk away and not fly as a result. Freedom reigns.

What could that not be applied to?

Riding the subway or bus is a voluntary act.

Using the highway system is a voluntary act.

Walking on the sidewalk is a voluntary act.

If you don't want to be searched, just don't use them?

You can't quite use the sidewalk as a gigantic gas filled weapon that can change the course of history in a single day though, can you?

The highways are monitored for the laws to be followed. State Troopers. Radar Guns. Hell0o0?

McVeigh did it. Using a public highway. So we should have checkpoints, and vehicle scanners and searches without probable cause...it will make us all safer.

Because using the public highway is a voluntary act...so no one should complain about it.

 

[LibertyForAll]

Incorrect... just the ones that want to get on a plane.

We have rights in a boat. We have rights in a moat. We have rights in a car.
We have rights wherever we are.

yep...and we have the right to know that the TSA has done all it could to ensure that you will not find the plane INTENTIONALLY crashing into a building.

Let me be clear. I am not against screening. I am against government screening. The reason I am against government screening is because it is governments place to protect our rights. If anything the government should allow the airlines to do the screening and they should put laws in place to ensure the fair treatment of individuals. This way they fulfill their mandate to protect us.

 

[Jarhead]

We have rights in a boat. We have rights in a moat. We have rights in a car.
We have rights wherever we are.

yep...and we have the right to know that the TSA has done all it could to ensure that you will not find the plane INTENTIONALLY crashing into a building.

Let me be clear. I am not against screening. I am against government screening. The reason I am against government screening is because it is governments place to protect our rights. If anything the government should allow the airlines to do the screening and they should put laws in place to ensure the fair treatment of individuals. This way they fulfill their mandate to protect us.

I am 100% good with this.

 

[Ravi]

Of course obama sides with the TSA!

White House sides with TSA in Rand Paul standoff - The Hill's Transportation Report

The White House is standing by the Transportation Security Administration in its standoff with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his father, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

The elder Paul called the TSA a "police state" Monday after Rand Paul was reportedly detained by TSA after he refused to take a pat-down from TSA officials at the Nashville International Airport.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that he didn't have any reaction to Paul's "police state" comments.

But Carney sided with the TSA saying, "I think it is absolutely essential that we take necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe."

Who knows, in the world of liberal equality, Rand Paul might well be a terrorist!

This is an absolutely BRILLIANT move by the liberal regime.

If Ron Paul thinks the TSA is a police state why isn't he exercising his second amendment rights?

 

[Contumacious]

What ARE yoiu waiting for, extremist? Come get us. We're not scared.

At the right time, Marxist. Then you will be squealing like a stuck hog.

.

Yea, no.

You're sitting on your computer while YOU FEEL your country is becoming fascist.

If *I* agreed with your whack views, I'd be outside getting shit done.

You lose - - because you ARE on your ass, typing to me, clown.

No , you would not.

You will find some pretext not to get involved.

Anyways, parasites love the fascistic welfare/warfare state.

.

.

 

[Conservative]

We have rights in a boat. We have rights in a moat. We have rights in a car.
We have rights wherever we are.

yep...and we have the right to know that the TSA has done all it could to ensure that you will not find the plane INTENTIONALLY crashing into a building.

Let me be clear. I am not against screening. I am against government screening. The reason I am against government screening is because it is governments place to protect our rights. If anything the government should allow the airlines to do the screening and they should put laws in place to ensure the fair treatment of individuals. This way they fulfill their mandate to protect us.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/204625-rand-paul-detained-by-tsa-18.html#post4706106

 

[Jarhead]

Of course obama sides with the TSA!

White House sides with TSA in Rand Paul standoff - The Hill's Transportation Report

The White House is standing by the Transportation Security Administration in its standoff with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his father, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

The elder Paul called the TSA a "police state" Monday after Rand Paul was reportedly detained by TSA after he refused to take a pat-down from TSA officials at the Nashville International Airport.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that he didn't have any reaction to Paul's "police state" comments.

But Carney sided with the TSA saying, "I think it is absolutely essential that we take necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe."

Who knows, in the world of liberal equality, Rand Paul might well be a terrorist!

This is an absolutely BRILLIANT move by the liberal regime.

If Ron Paul thinks the TSA is a police state why isn't he exercising his second amendment rights?

I believe in the second ammendment but I dont exercise my right as secured by that ammendment.

Having a right means "if you opt to" with the defining words being "if" and "opt".

Nice hat.

 

[Jarhead]

At the right time, Marxist. Then you will be squealing like a stuck hog.

.

Yea, no.

You're sitting on your computer while YOU FEEL your country is becoming fascist.

If *I* agreed with your whack views, I'd be outside getting shit done.

You lose - - because you ARE on your ass, typing to me, clown.

No , you would not.

You will find some pretext not to get involved.

Anyways, parasites love the fascistic welfare/warfare state.

.

.

No..

Just some of us realize that when we are presented with new challanges that require immmediate solutions, those solutions may not be ideal...but they are still needed.....just require fine tuning..

 

[Contumacious]

Of course obama sides with the TSA!

White House sides with TSA in Rand Paul standoff - The Hill's Transportation Report

The White House is standing by the Transportation Security Administration in its standoff with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his father, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

The elder Paul called the TSA a "police state" Monday after Rand Paul was reportedly detained by TSA after he refused to take a pat-down from TSA officials at the Nashville International Airport.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that he didn't have any reaction to Paul's "police state" comments.

But Carney sided with the TSA saying, "I think it is absolutely essential that we take necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe."

Who knows, in the world of liberal equality, Rand Paul might well be a terrorist!

This is an absolutely BRILLIANT move by the liberal regime.

If Ron Paul thinks the TSA is a police state why isn't he exercising his second amendment rights?

Because by definition a police state has powerful domestic armies. So a violent uprising must be a concerted effort.

.

 

[G.T.]

What could that not be applied to?

Riding the subway or bus is a voluntary act.

Using the highway system is a voluntary act.

Walking on the sidewalk is a voluntary act.

If you don't want to be searched, just don't use them?

You can't quite use the sidewalk as a gigantic gas filled weapon that can change the course of history in a single day though, can you?

The highways are monitored for the laws to be followed. State Troopers. Radar Guns. Hell0o0?

McVeigh did it. Using a public highway. So we should have checkpoints, and vehicle scanners and searches without probable cause...it will make us all safer.

Because using the public highway is a voluntary act...so no one should complain about it.

No, I think there are reasonable scales of securing things.

 

[G.T.]

At the right time, Marxist. Then you will be squealing like a stuck hog.

.

Yea, no.

You're sitting on your computer while YOU FEEL your country is becoming fascist.

If *I* agreed with your whack views, I'd be outside getting shit done.

You lose - - because you ARE on your ass, typing to me, clown.

No , you would not.

You will find some pretext not to get involved.

Anyways, parasites love the fascistic welfare/warfare state.

.

.

So do you, apparently, just sitting there and taking it in the ass and only "talking" about rebellion. Woulda shoulda coulda assed chump.

 

[Ravi]

Of course obama sides with the TSA!

White House sides with TSA in Rand Paul standoff - The Hill's Transportation Report

The White House is standing by the Transportation Security Administration in its standoff with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his father, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

The elder Paul called the TSA a "police state" Monday after Rand Paul was reportedly detained by TSA after he refused to take a pat-down from TSA officials at the Nashville International Airport.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that he didn't have any reaction to Paul's "police state" comments.

But Carney sided with the TSA saying, "I think it is absolutely essential that we take necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe."

Who knows, in the world of liberal equality, Rand Paul might well be a terrorist!

This is an absolutely BRILLIANT move by the liberal regime.

If Ron Paul thinks the TSA is a police state why isn't he exercising his second amendment rights?

Because by definition a police state has powerful domestic armies. So a violent uprising must be a concerted effort.

.

Then why isn't he calling for one? Don't tell me he's wimping out!

 

[Missourian]

You can't quite use the sidewalk as a gigantic gas filled weapon that can change the course of history in a single day though, can you?

The highways are monitored for the laws to be followed. State Troopers. Radar Guns. Hell0o0?

McVeigh did it. Using a public highway. So we should have checkpoints, and vehicle scanners and searches without probable cause...it will make us all safer.

Because using the public highway is a voluntary act...so no one should complain about it.

No, I think there are reasonable scales of securing things.

So under what circumstances does it become reasonable to search everyone, anywhere, anytime?

It's the true slippery slope. Once you start down it, where does it end?

 

[MikeK]

Paulie,

Domestic airspace travel is as much the Government's jurisdiction as public roads are. That's why, in order to drive a car - you have to submit to a driver's test, a 5 hour course and have a car deemed "passed" of an inspection. There's also State Troopers monitoring speed limits, etc. and a slew of other safety measures in place.

These things began decades and decades ago and we're still not getting single file marched into fema camps and unable to speak our minds.

That's really not a solid comparison.

Every one of the requirements for operating a car on public thoroughfare is indispensable. But indiscriminately subjecting every prospective airline passenger to the same level of scrutiny is plainly redundant, as evidenced by the Israeli method which is structured around practical and sensible profiling. In the most basic example of airline passenger profiling, should a U.S. Senator be subjected to the same level of scrutiny as a Middle Eastern woman in a burka?

If so -- why?

 

[G.T.]

McVeigh did it. Using a public highway. So we should have checkpoints, and vehicle scanners and searches without probable cause...it will make us all safer.

Because using the public highway is a voluntary act...so no one should complain about it.

No, I think there are reasonable scales of securing things.

So under what circumstances does it become reasonable to search everyone, anywhere, anytime?

It's the true slippery slope. Once you start down it, where does it end?

Well it's pretty much a fact that there's n ot enough people to have thjat wide eyed theory of searching everyone everywhere all the time - also a fact that the economy would crash as everything would severely slow so...I wouldn't go getting panties shitted in over such a theory.

Secondly, I don't subscribe to slippery slope theories. Issues can stand on their own merit, we're not all retards and some of us can examine the gray area issue by issue without needing universals.

for instance?

tight airplane security is common sense - as planes are a historically common place for terror hijackings and have the ability to cause widespread chaos - such as 9/11 effecting the actual economic stability of the country.

patting people down to go into hard rock concerts is smart. a lot of drinking and fights happens at all the ones I've been to.

Probably stupid/redundant to have pat-downs for an Opera.

 

[Katzndogz]

Stopping Rand Paul was an unconstitutional exercise of authority. He is a senator going to perform senatorial duties. He has a privilege to travel without impediment.