Rand Paul detained by TSA

[G.T.]

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 are 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?

Profiling is ******* dumb. There's Muslims that look as white as Andy Dick - it's also disturbing to be discriminated against like that - it's even more-so "fascist/police state" like (picking people because of who they ARE AS AN INDIVIDUAL, as opposed to at random).

 

[Jarhead]

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.

People are searched at airports in an effort to prevent pre-meditated actions
People are searched at concerts in an effort to prevent something bad going worse....people get wasted at concerts and fights likely break out...you know...."hey, dont touch me dude"....and without weapons, it is usually nothing more than a little muscle flexing.

 

[G.T.]

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.

People are searched at airports in an effort to prevent pre-meditated actions
People are searched at concerts in an effort to prevent something bad going worse....people get wasted at concerts and fights likely break out...you know...."hey, dont touch me dude"....and without weapons, it is usually nothing more than a little muscle flexing.

exactly.

 

[Jarhead]

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 are 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?

Profiling is ******* dumb. There's Muslims that look as white as Andy Dick - it's also disturbing to be discriminated against like that - it's even more-so "fascist/police state" like (picking people because of who they ARE AS AN INDIVIDUAL, as opposed to at random).

So then you agree....deport all muslims and we dont need to worry about racial profiling.

 

[Jarhead]

That's really not a solid comparison.

Every one of the requirements for operating a car on public thoroughfare are 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?

Profiling is ******* dumb. There's Muslims that look as white as Andy Dick - it's also disturbing to be discriminated against like that - it's even more-so "fascist/police state" like (picking people because of who they ARE AS AN INDIVIDUAL, as opposed to at random).

So then you agree....deport all muslims and we dont need to worry about racial profiling.

and as a Jew I say deport all blonds......you never know which ones may be nazis.

 

[mskafka]

Rand Paul detained by TSA - Tim Mak - POLITICO.com

Things about to get interesting.

Dang, you beat me to it. I just read this on my local news. Ron vs. Rand...two different people, imo.

 

[MikeK]

Why should he have been killed? I don't see how bin-Laden couldn't have been more valuable alive.

Exactly!

bin Laden was silenced -- for essentially the same reason as Timothy McVeigh's execution took place in strikingly record time. Government didn't want either of these villains talking about their respective motivations.

Saddam Hussein was a much better example of a media-free trial, "limited"-witnesses & speedy-execution.

I don't know about much better, but he definitely was another example of convenient elimination to keep him quiet.

 

[G.T.]

That's really not a solid comparison.

Every one of the requirements for operating a car on public thoroughfare are 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?

Profiling is ******* dumb. There's Muslims that look as white as Andy Dick - it's also disturbing to be discriminated against like that - it's even more-so "fascist/police state" like (picking people because of who they ARE AS AN INDIVIDUAL, as opposed to at random).

So then you agree....deport all muslims and we dont need to worry about racial profiling.

No, that's not the same thing.

Like I said - I see gray areas and don't believe in "slippery slope" theory. It's stupid to me. We can't respect our own minds enough to look at these things on a case by case basis?

 

[HUGGY]

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.

Real funny and a broken major rule here at USMB. Truth is being alert is one of the things I get paid for so if you made it over the fence you would have to get passed a 70lb and a 120lb pitbull(Lightning and Thunder) not their real names..witheld for security reasons.. and by the time and if you had any limbs left and managed to make it to the third floor entrance I have full authority to **** that person up beyond reconizability. Oh ya...I am not married. Have a nice day clown.

 

[rightwinger]

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.

Evidently, he doesn't

 

[LibertyForAll]

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.

Slippery slope is really an issue of precedence. We allow certain rights to be violated "for our own good" and this makes it easier to convince people to give up rights in other areas too. When you look at each individual issue, you sometimes miss the big picture.

 

[Jarhead]

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.

Real funny and a broken major rule here at USMB. Truth is being alert is one of the things I get paid for so if you made it over the fence you would have to get passed a 70lb and a 120lb pitbull(Lightning and Thunder) not their real names..witheld for security reasons.. and by the time and if you had any limbs left and managed to make it to the third floor entrance I have full authority to **** that person up beyond reconizability. Oh ya...I am not married. Have a nice day clown.

Didnt know I broke a rule.
Sorry to the Mods.

In the meantime....you are really full of yourself there huggy.....

Likely some 40 year old loser down in moms basement sitting in your underwear typing away on the internet....

 

[rightwinger]

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?

Under the circumstances that when you buy a ticket you are providing a consent to search.

 

[Jarhead]

Profiling is ******* dumb. There's Muslims that look as white as Andy Dick - it's also disturbing to be discriminated against like that - it's even more-so "fascist/police state" like (picking people because of who they ARE AS AN INDIVIDUAL, as opposed to at random).

So then you agree....deport all muslims and we dont need to worry about racial profiling.

No, that's not the same thing.

Like I said - I see gray areas and don't believe in "slippery slope" theory. It's stupid to me. We can't respect our own minds enough to look at these things on a case by case basis?

We can.

Unfortunately, government doesnt do that...they do what their fianncail supporters tell them to do.

 

[G.T.]

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.

Slippery slope is really an issue of precedence. We allow certain rights to be violated "for our own good" and this makes it easier to convince people to give up rights in other areas too. When you look at each individual issue, you sometimes miss the big picture.

I disagree. I don't think rights are being violated, I'm saying that I think that that's hyperbole.

That ok?>

 

[Jarhead]

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.

Evidently, he doesn't

And he shouldnt.

As we are finding out......politicians are no more to be trusted than anyone else.

 

[Conservative]

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

Real funny and a broken major rule here at USMB. Truth is being alert is one of the things I get paid for so if you made it over the fence you would have to get passed a 70lb and a 120lb pitbull(Lightning and Thunder) not their real names..witheld for security reasons.. and by the time and if you had any limbs left and managed to make it to the third floor entrance I have full authority to **** that person up beyond reconizability. Oh ya...I am not married. Have a nice day clown.

Didnt know I broke a rule.
Sorry to the Mods.

In the meantime....you are really full of yourself there huggy.....

Likely some 40 year old loser down in moms basement sitting in your underwear typing away on the internet....

you did not personally attack his wife, therefore no rule was broken.

Sorry, Huggy. But he's safe.

 

[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 are 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?

Profiling is ******* dumb. There's Muslims that look as white as Andy Dick - it's also disturbing to be discriminated against like that - it's even more-so "fascist/police state" like (picking people because of who they ARE AS AN INDIVIDUAL, as opposed to at random).

The Israelis have been doing it for as long as we've been doing our relatively ineffective thing (we've had several breaches) and they've had no security breaches at all. And Israel is a far more likely target for terrorist attack than we are. So how do you explain that?

The logical response to your politically correct protest is, simply, common sense. I have no cause to suspect that a U.S. Senator might be a terrorist. But I have very good cause to suspect that an unknown Middle Eastern woman in a burka might be. And anyone who doesn't like that answer doesn't have to fly.

Profiling makes sense.

 

[HUGGY]

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

Real funny and a broken major rule here at USMB. Truth is being alert is one of the things I get paid for so if you made it over the fence you would have to get passed a 70lb and a 120lb pitbull(Lightning and Thunder) not their real names..witheld for security reasons.. and by the time and if you had any limbs left and managed to make it to the third floor entrance I have full authority to **** that person up beyond reconizability. Oh ya...I am not married. Have a nice day clown.

Didnt know I broke a rule.
Sorry to the Mods.

In the meantime....you are really full of yourself there huggy.....

Likely some 40 year old loser down in moms basement sitting in your underwear typing away on the internet....

Nope..a fine looking 62 year old "loser"..my pic is only 5 years old. I handle break in's about two or three a month now at this property...and over the past two years..I've had to "explain" it to only around half a dozen that actually made it past the fences. That does not count the ones within the property parimeter. Giver a try! I'm always available to "splain it" to ya. PS I don't wear underwear. Never have. Oh ya..I do like me more than you..quite peceptive!

 

[Conservative]

That's really not a solid comparison.

Every one of the requirements for operating a car on public thoroughfare are 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?

Profiling is ******* dumb. There's Muslims that look as white as Andy Dick - it's also disturbing to be discriminated against like that - it's even more-so "fascist/police state" like (picking people because of who they ARE AS AN INDIVIDUAL, as opposed to at random).

The Israelis have been doing it for as long as we've been doing our relatively ineffective thing (we've had several breeches) and they've had no security breeches at all. And Israel is a far more likely target for terrorist attack than we are. So how do you explain that?

The logical response to your politically correct protest is, simply, common sense. I have no cause to suspect that a U.S. Senator might be a terrorist. But I have very good cause to suspect that an unknown Middle Eastern woman in a burka might be. And anyone who doesn't like that answer doesn't have to fly.

Profiling makes sense.

Israel profiles behavior, not race or religion.