|
|
| TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search (902214) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (902214) | |
TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:03:34 2012 Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) was detained at Nashville International Airport this morning by TSA officials, according to airport staff. The senator, whose father, Ron, is a GOP presidential candidate, is said to have refused a full-body pat-down search.The GOP gave us the TSA...now they have to deal with the monster they created. |
|
|
| (902218) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 11:14:26 2012, in response to TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:03:34 2012. I think "held" means he is not being allowed to go to the gate. From the context in the article it doesn't sound like it means he is being detained. I think he's free to go home if he wishes. He's just not free to get on a plane. |
|
|
| (902220) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:20:29 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 11:14:26 2012. I see "held" here in the same vein as "held pending questioning", and therefore not free to gop. The update says he is still at the airport and "unable to board his flight". Apparently, they're not letting him get on the plane, OR leave the airport. |
|
|
| (902221) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Mon Jan 23 11:29:59 2012, in response to TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:03:34 2012. Why did they want to do a full-body patdown? AFAIK he's not a 90-year-old grandmother in a wheelchair? |
|
|
| (902224) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Mon Jan 23 11:37:43 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by SLRT on Mon Jan 23 11:29:59 2012. Maybe he's wearing a colostomy bag? |
|
|
| (902226) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:39:00 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by SLRT on Mon Jan 23 11:29:59 2012. The senator says a metal implant in his body set off the detector, but the TSA says he refused to consent to a follow-up search to confirm that. Apparently, the TSA feels they must protect us from dangerous United States Senators from Bowling Green, as well as little old ladies from Long Beach. |
|
|
| (902227) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 23 11:39:08 2012, in response to TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:03:34 2012. The GOP gave us the TSA. . . but it took the DNC to turn it into today's monster. |
|
|
| (902228) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 23 11:39:51 2012, in response to TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:03:34 2012. The GOP gave us the TSA. . . but it took the DNC to turn it into today's monster. (Whoops; that's partisan. Why can't the liberals admit that it was all liberals that created the TSA in its current and past forms?) |
|
|
| (902229) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:40:24 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 23 11:39:08 2012. I seriously beg to differ. The TSA grew into the monster it is today under the two Bush administrations. |
|
|
| (902231) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:41:42 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 23 11:39:51 2012. What "liberals" created the TSA? DHS--and the TSA--were Bush creations, and GWB appointed his fellow Republican, Tom Ridge, to be the first DHS Secretary. |
|
|
| (902232) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jan 23 11:43:12 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:40:24 2012. That's right, and it was well established by the time the Democratic Party won back the House and Senate. It's bush's monster, plain and simple. |
|
|
| (902234) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Jan 23 11:46:03 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by bingbong on Mon Jan 23 11:43:12 2012. It's bush's monster, plain and simple.It's not a monster. It's NECESSARY. It's one of the few good things that the Bush Administration and the GOP Congress did during their otherwise catastrophic time in power. |
|
|
| (902237) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:52:48 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by SMAZ on Mon Jan 23 11:46:03 2012. While I agree with you that strict airport security is a necessary evil of our time, I cannot accept the manner in which the TSA sometimes carries that out. They often abuse their authority, harass abd humiliate travelers, and subject them to the most demeaning scrutiny, all in the name of "security". There were skyjackings long before 0/11, and we did just fine at securing aircraft for decades before 2001.There has to be a better way to do airline security...how about not letting suspected terrorists get NEAR the airport in the first place? Oh, wait... |
|
|
| (902238) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Jan 23 11:54:27 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by SMAZ on Mon Jan 23 11:46:03 2012. It's not a monster. It's NECESSARY.It's one of the few good things that the Bush Administration and the GOP Congress did during their otherwise catastrophic time in power. The only post 9/11 change that has prevented additional incidents has been locking the cockpit door. |
|
|
| (902249) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Jan 23 12:17:24 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Jan 23 11:54:27 2012. The only post 9/11 change that has prevented additional incidents has been locking the cockpit door.Locking a cockpit door doesn't prevent an explosive-laden suicide bomber like a Richard Reid or the Underwear Guy. Thank God they were incompetent. They boarded overseas. They would not have made it past TSA. |
|
|
| (902251) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Jan 23 12:19:39 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:52:48 2012. There has to be a better way to do airline security...how about not letting suspected terrorists get NEAR the airport in the first place?Yes, ubiquitous roadblocks, scanners in American streets and out-of-control-government snooping and police powers would prevent terrorists from getting near an airport. Is that what you want in lieu of TSA? |
|
|
| (902257) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 12:25:11 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by SMAZ on Mon Jan 23 12:17:24 2012. They would not have made it past TSA.I disagree. Undercover inspectors have routinely been successful in getting dummy weapons past TSA screeners in recent years. An ABC News report quoting the TSA director said "every test gun, bomb part or knife got past screeners at some airports". Perhaps the GAO's undercovers are so successful because TSA agents are busy squeezing colostomy bags and strip-searching old women in wheelchairs? |
|
|
| (902274) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 12:41:43 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:20:29 2012. The article doesn't say that he isn't free to leave the airport. Mediocre journalism. What I read into it (and I could be wrong) is that he is free to leave but is deliberately not leaving to create publicity for the absurdness of the TSA's treatment of him. |
|
|
| (902281) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:44:21 2012, in response to TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:03:34 2012. The TSA, along with the Dept. Of Homeland Security were ideas that originated within the Democratic Party, and for which had almost universal support from Democrats when they were created in the weeks after 9/11.You are really skating on thin ice, Nathan. If you feel compelled to offer idiotic statements of opinion every time you post about something about a current event, you had better be damned sure you have your facts straight. |
|
|
| (902283) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:47:27 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by SLRT on Mon Jan 23 11:29:59 2012. There's an interesting debate on Twitter over whether it's even constitutional to allow an agency of the executive branch to police members of the legislative branch while Congress is in session:Section 6 of the US Constitution: Clause 1: The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, beprivileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place. |
|
|
| (902284) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Mon Jan 23 12:48:04 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:39:00 2012. Besides, libertarians do not blow themselves up at airports, though they respect your right to make that decision for yourself. |
|
|
| (902286) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 12:49:06 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:44:21 2012. The TSA, along with the Dept. Of Homeland Security were ideas that originated within the Democratic Party, and for which had almost universal support from Democrats when they were created in the weeks after 9/11.Sure. The only question was whether they should be govt employees or private contractors. All the rest had 100% bipartisan agreement. How would it be any different if private contractors were behaving so highhandedly, other than that the public would have even less influence because the contractors would just say "we're only doing what our contract calls for"? |
|
|
| (902287) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:49:21 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Jan 23 11:54:27 2012. And preventing (or making it extremely) in getting boxcutters on board a plane. |
|
|
| (902290) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 12:51:07 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:47:27 2012. No indication in the article that he has been arrested. Here's an indication (despite what the URL says) that he wasn't ever detained.http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/rand-paul-detained-by-tsa-in-nashville |
|
|
| (902291) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:51:25 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jan 23 11:39:51 2012. This is what happens when conservatives work with liberals. When a conservative joins forces with a liberal in enacting a liberal policy, the liberal will ALWAYS place sole blame on the conservative when the inevitable failure occurs. |
|
|
| (902292) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 12:51:35 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 12:41:43 2012. In "reading into it" that Paul is "deliberately not leaving to create publicity", you assume facts not in evidence here. |
|
|
| (902293) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 23 12:52:24 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 12:25:11 2012. To be fair, what's to prevent somebody from stashing a small explosive on some old lady or kid? No one would normally suspect little old ladies or kids to be terrorists (the PLO certainly learned this). |
|
|
| (902294) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:52:29 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 12:51:07 2012. Detained is probably a better word. The clause specifically mentions he cannot be prevented from free movement, and Paul most definitely was. |
|
|
| (902296) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 12:53:07 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:44:21 2012. Which "Democrat(s)", specifically, "originated" the "ideas" of DHS and TSA? |
|
|
| (902298) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Mon Jan 23 12:56:07 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:47:27 2012. The deceased Congressman Adam Clayton Powell Jr., had an open warrant for him to be served a summons in New York State to answer a complaint (I believe it was a civil complaint) that he had slandered a woman by describing her as "a bag lady for the [the police, a criminal? I forget]". He was also a preacher in Harlem and he physically only showed up in his district on Sunday to preach, because he could not be served the summons on Sunday.The fact he never challenged that he COULD be served other days suggests that he was not GENERALLY immune from from a legal process because he was a Congressman. So I would think the operative question wsa whether Paul was going to or from a Session of Congress. Notwithstanding all that, I think the TSA was asinine. |
|
|
| (902299) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jan 23 12:57:31 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:20:29 2012. I see "held" here in the same vein as "held pending questioning", and therefore not free to gop. The recent update now confirms what many of us thought - that he was not detained but rather than he was not permitted to proceed. If he remained in the area, it could have been for any number of reasons, including his likely desire to still board that plane or any plane so he could get to where he was planning on going. |
|
|
| (902300) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Mon Jan 23 12:58:07 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 11:41:42 2012. Didn't you know? GWB messed up so much, it's obvious he was really liberal. One characteristic of all conservatives is that they do not mess up. 8-) |
|
|
| (902301) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 12:58:23 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 12:51:07 2012. The TSA says he wasn't "detained". However, Paul, as the article you linked notes, "excoriated" TSA Director John Pistole last summer at a hearing, over the TSA's heavy-handed treatment. Perhaps this is the TSA playing tit-for-tat with Paul?In any event, given the TSA's track record when it comes to things like searches and detentions, I tend to think Paul is telling the truth, and I am hardly a right-winger. |
|
|
| (902305) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:03:48 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jan 23 12:57:31 2012. "Not permitted to proceed"? He was, according to the article I linked in the OP, "held", which I think most people would interpret as "not being free to leave", not merely "unable to proceed".You're word-humping again, I see. |
|
|
| (902307) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Mon Jan 23 13:08:57 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:51:25 2012. Yeah I liked it better when they had drugged-up illegal immigrants without background checks working for minimum wage manning airport security.I felt so safe since no failure ever occurred on their watch. It was TSA that let the 9/11 hijackers through. |
|
|
| (902308) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jan 23 13:10:08 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:03:48 2012. You're word-humping again, I see. That line is usually used by people who are wrong. Seriously. Check back at previous mentions. As usual, you fail to understand that we actually are discussing specific words in the article to figure out what actually happened. "Not permitted to proceed"? He was, according to the article I linked in the OP, "held", which I think most people would interpret as "not being free to leave", not merely "unable to proceed". Incorrect. In this context, he was held from passing through security. He could not proceed through security since he triggered an alarm and would not submit to additional searches. The TSA likely did not want him to go off on his own and try to go through a different line without those other TSA officers knowing that he had just failed a security test. If he wanted to surrender his boarding pass and leave the airport, I don't see why he wouldn't have been allowed to. |
|
|
| (902314) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 13:19:19 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jan 23 12:52:29 2012. "Paul most definitely was"Source? I posted a source saying he wasn't. |
|
|
| (902315) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 13:20:14 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 12:58:23 2012. I tend to think Paul is telling the truthYour source for Paul saying he WAS detained is what? |
|
|
| (902317) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:23:45 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 13:20:14 2012. Paul's office. I think they are right. |
|
|
| (902327) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:29:39 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jan 23 13:10:08 2012. WRONG! Paul, in the context of what was reported, was "held" by the TSA, not "from passing through" the TSA screening area. Because Paul refused an additional search, he was most likely "held" pending further investigation. I don't think he was free to leave the airport, nor do I think any reasonable person reading this account of the incident would think Paul was free to go, either. |
|
|
| (902330) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:30:51 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jan 23 12:57:31 2012. You know what "Many of us thought"? You're a telepath now? |
|
|
| (902332) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jan 23 13:32:10 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:29:39 2012. I just posted the opposite. Why don't you address that? Furthermore, hasn't it been posted that the TSA can not detain you, and that they can only call the police to detain you? |
|
|
| (902334) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jan 23 13:32:38 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 12:41:43 2012. Fact is, his treatment is NOT absurd at all. To not subject him to further screening is a violation of policy. He set off the first detector. Everyone (and here's where the no profiling policy applies) who sets off the first detector is subject to further screening. Period. |
|
|
| (902335) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jan 23 13:32:47 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:30:51 2012. No, I simply read the posts on this forum. |
|
|
| (902337) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jan 23 13:35:33 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by SLRT on Mon Jan 23 12:48:04 2012. Given that the majority of domestic terrorists have been RW since the 1970s, it's a fair drop to subject any RWer to additional screening. |
|
|
| (902342) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 13:40:46 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:29:39 2012. We're talking about news reports based on tweets. If we both had the kind of money Mitt Romney has, I would bet you $10,000 that when Rand tweeted "detained" he meant it in the sense of "not permitted to proceed beyond the security checkpoint". |
|
|
| (902344) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:41:32 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jan 23 13:32:10 2012. No, you posted your interpretation of what the article said, not "the opposite". As for whether the TSA can or cannot detain you, why not go out to JFK, and refuse to be searched after entering the screening area? Try to leave the airport and see what happens to you. I do believe, much to your surprise, that the TSA and PAPD will suddenly take a great interest in you and your actions, and you will quickly find yourself a guest of Building 269.The TSA has the right to search you and your belongings without probable cause or a search warrant, once you enter the security area. In addition, the TSA most certainly can hold you pending the arrival of the police. |
|
|
| (902345) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 13:42:00 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by bingbong on Mon Jan 23 13:32:38 2012. You are probably right. I should have said "apparently absurd". |
|
|
| (902347) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:43:08 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 13:40:46 2012. Most reasonable people would interpret "detained" as "not free to leave". |
|
|
| (902349) | |
Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Jan 23 13:43:57 2012, in response to Re: TSA Detains Sen. Rand Paul For Refusing Pat-Down Search, posted by JayZeeBMT on Mon Jan 23 13:41:32 2012. As for whether the TSA can or cannot detain you, why not go out to JFK, and refuse to be searched after entering the screening area? Try to leave the airport and see what happens to you. I do believe, much to your surprise, that the TSA and PAPD will suddenly take a great interest in you and your actions, and you will quickly find yourself a guest of Building 269.Do you have a single documented case of someone truly being arrested, or even detained while the police were called, for politely declining some step in the search process and then trying to leave the airport? |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|