U.S. Senator Rand Paul’s current standoff with the TSA at a Nashville airport could potentially represent a perfect reason to dismantle the TSA, at least in the eyes of Americans who are concerned over the trampling on Constitutional rights by the government.
Story at Ran Paul TSA Standoff a Reason to Dismantle TSA and Ron Paul Slams out of control Police State.
Of course the screw-the-Constitution-in-chief sided with the TSA
All I’m going to say is this:
While not defending the POTUS or his administration, where was this outrage at the administration over the past 12 years, especially early on when the TSA was created? Yes, Obama carries the blame for this incident, but the others during Bush years, and Bush creating this farce of an agency carries a lot of the blame as well.
In short, there is enough blame to go around and all around, not just with the current administration.
BL.
The Whitehouse was correct, it’s the law, take the pat-down. Don’t want to? Then change the law.
Taking a stand that as a Senator he’s above the law is a bit disingenuous from both the Pauls.
Of course that’s in keeping with Congress having established the TSA with the full and certain knowledge that THEY would never have to be screened.
“All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
Ahh, a quote from Animal Farm, by George Orwell. That is very true, and perfectly describes everything going on.
However, I believe Article I, section 6 of the US Constitution prevents what the TSA was doing:
They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged 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.
The TSA violated that, and justifiably so, should have had the Constitution thrown in their face.
BL.
What part of “Breach of the Peace” need be explained? Nor was he arrested at any time, the TSA can’t arrest anyone.
For whatever reason, Paul declined to be patted down and threw a hissy fit when he wasn’t allowed to board his flight. Now we’re being subjected to the vitriol from both he and his father because someone dared lay hands on the chosen one.
I don’t favor either poltical side left or right so I like to think I see this from an independent standpoint. My first 12 years in the working world I spent working for several airlines. I got to see the famous, the notorious, the elite, the washups, the has beens…everyone.
I have seen several politicians give the I’m too good for this attitude at the checkpoint (and the other points along the way for that matter). I’ve seen other well knowns do the same thing. I’m sure there are politics behind it since the Pauls are very anti-big government and view the TSA as an agent thereof. Of course the people I saw give the same attitude were during pre TSA times.
My question is this, had it not been a TSA checkpoint would he have acted the same way?
I was working the morning of 9/11. Even prior there were invasions of privacy in the screening process. After 9/11 it became obvious that those measures would have to be more invasive. Of course we have quick memories and now 10 years later we’re back to “they’re taking our rights away”.
I don’t really care if we go back to a system of privatized screening. The fact of the matter is no matter the uniform, your privacy will still be breached to some extent. It doesn’t have you be. You can drive to where you’re going. Flying is afterall a choice.