TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... _tear.html

What is the point of having a fourth amendment if the government can "waive" your rights anytime it chooses to. When I was a child if an agent of the government wanted to search your body, your bags or your house they had to have a warrant, or at minimum probable cause, and if they did not have that it was an illegal search and they were liable for damages and criminal charges. First it was "don't like the metal detectors--don't fly", then it was don't like the strip searches/molestations--don't fly, they used the bad line that because you were in an airport you consented to having your private areas groped hard enough to cause pain and/or having your clothing removed digitally or even by hand. Now they are showing up in bus stations around the country, and at major sporting events. Now I don't know TX law as well as I know VA law so I would guess that unless the bus station was posted 30.06 that you would be perfectly legal to carry there. Perhaps I am wrong.

However if bus stations and sporting events are perfectly legitimate venue's for the TSA, where will the TSA show up next with their probing fingers and strip search machines? Maybe at your local mall. These are the feds do they know local firearm law--I doubt it. So when you go to a mall that is not posted and you are concealed carrying and they coerce you into a pat down (you will let us pat you down or we will fine you 11,000) and find your sidearm what is going to happen then? Remember these are the same guys that attempted to make a disabled child walk through a scanner, and have stolen thousands of items from passengers, and have assaulted countless people. Do you trust them to know the law in your area? Why are our elected representatives allowing this to continue?

mamabearCali wrote:What is the point of having a fourth amendment if the government can "waive" your rights anytime it chooses to.

The point of the Fourth Amendment was to prevent systematic abuse like that, same as the Second Amendment should have prevented NFA, GCA and a host of other infringements.

Power corrupts.

mamabearCali wrote: Why are our elected representatives allowing this to continue?

Nothing is going to change until people withdraw their support --by which I mean money. The TSA screening at airports would change virtually overnight if people stopped flying. Is there a limit to what Americans will tolerate? Most people already tolerate all kinds of intrusions into their lives and their privacy in order to give their money away in completely discretionary expenditures --like theme parks, concerts, and sporting events-- so I think we've got a very long way to go before most people will redirect their money.

The same rationalizations used for airport searches are going to be used for searches in every other location and the same apologists will make excuses for them just as they now do for TSA groping and diaper sniffing. People will still line up and go to the mall and they'll say they feel safer. But to your larger question, I think the solution for any venue where such searches will be conducted is simple: post 30.06 signs. Soccer mommy will be scared for little Johnny if those crazy people with guns get exposed at the mall scanner, and there are a lot more frightened soccer mommies than there are CHL holders.

I am doing what I can--I don't fly, and I can choose to not take a bus/train (I have a car and therefore right now I have an option). I write my representatives on a regular basis expressing my displeasure with the TSA and asking what are they doing about it. I have been to parks (like Sea World/Busch Gardens) and I can tell you that the "searches" there a very minor inconvenience that I dislike but put up with (I open my diaper bag, they put in a stick and push the diapers around, I close the diaper bag), they do not search your body and there is no genital touching. I can even avoid these searches if I wish, but I do need to go shopping from time to time so what am I going to do? How far are we going to allow these guys to go?

...We the People haven't TOLD the government much about what they can and can't do lately...we've let them tell US...that's backwards...till we stand up to the elected officials and remind them clearly that they work for us...they're going to keep reeling in the hook...till we're THEIR slaves...they're banking on our not ever saying "IT STOPS HERE"...so was King George...

I just took a trip to California and back, and I drove specifically so that I wouldn't have to deal with TSA. Flying would have been cheaper, with current gas prices, and I could have spent 3 hours each way flying, instead of 3 days driving outbound and 4 days returning on the highways.

I chose not to fly because I refuse to allow government pen-pushers dictate how much shampoo I can carry on a plane, and I refuse to allow government thugs to juggle my junk or fondle my wife's breasts. Period. My private parts are not a threat to the national security, and tickling them won't make the nation safer.

Janet Napolitano is a weazle, and she is exactly the kind of bureaucrat who would have been comfortable in Soviet Russia. I'm actually surprised she got elected dog-catcher in Arizona. Perhaps the state level is the limit of her competence.

I am not one of those who advocates for, or relishes the idea of, any kind of armed revolution against the federal government. But if one ever does happen, it will be the Department of Homeland Security and TSA policies that pushes things over the edge. Right now, I fear less the tyranny of Congress, the presidency, or the courts (although all three are bad enough), than I fear the tyranny of faceless officialdom hiding in the bowels of a bureaucracy which is dedicated to the the daily erosion of our personal freedoms. Homeland Security and the TSA are where that particular nest of vipers happens to be ensconced at this time. Both agencies are in drastic need of reform, along with BATF.

My wife and I have traveled the world and I have stopped flying for all the reasons stated. She flies some to NYC to see a grandson but not me.

speedsix wrote:...We the People haven't TOLD the government much about what they can and can't do lately...we've let them tell US...that's backwards...till we stand up to the elected officials and remind them clearly that they work for us...they're going to keep reeling in the hook...till we're THEIR slaves...they're banking on our not ever saying "IT STOPS HERE"...so was King George...

and it's been more than one hundred years since We the People told them in a way power hungry politicians understand.

mamabearCali wrote:I have been to parks (like Sea World/Busch Gardens) and I can tell you that the "searches" there a very minor inconvenience that I dislike but put up with (I open my diaper bag, they put in a stick and push the diapers around, I close the diaper bag), they do not search your body and there is no genital touching. I can even avoid these searches if I wish, but I do need to go shopping from time to time so what am I going to do? How far are we going to allow these guys to go?

I don't go to theme parks and I've only been to one concert since searches have become routine, and don't plan to attend another, so I only know of these searches by what I read. If you dislike such searches why put up with them? I would suggest to you that people tolerating these searches because they find them to be a "minor inconvenience" is at least part of the reason searches are becoming more intrusive at places like airports, and more pervasive generally. Once people become accustomed to the "minor inconveniences" the next step is always a little easier. Intended or not, searches at theme parks and concerts and airports, etc., are conditioning exercises. Americans are slowly being conditioned to accept violations of their persons and their privacy by just about anyone who appears to be exercising any kind of authority.

If you went to visit a neighbor and he wanted to root through your purse or your diaper bag before you entered his house, would you let him? Why not? What about a relative? Again, why not let a relative look through your bag if he or she wanted --or neighbor, or friend? after all, you're willing to let a stranger look. Would you continue to trade at a grocery store that wanted to have a look through your purse or diaper bag?

Why does Sea World need to search your diaper bag? I suggest the reason is that they've made the calculation that they'll make more money selling food and drinks inside then they'll lose in ticket sales, so essentially you're letting them search your bag for the privilege of giving them even more of your money. I'm one of the ticket sales they sacrificed to get you to spend your money on food and soft drinks.

so here's the question, you say you need to go shopping once in a while...why would you need to go to a mall where they would conceivably set up such 'check points' ?

other options:

strip centers; actually becoming more popular, safer (not so much of a 'target' as far as terrorism and such goes)
shop online for brands and sizes you are familiar with
shop local
shop etsy, and such, you get one of a kind, you support mostly stay at home moms trying to make a buck

SewTexas wrote:so here's the question, you say you need to go shopping once in a while...why would you need to go to a mall where they would conceivably set up such 'check points' ?

other options:

strip centers; actually becoming more popular, safer (not so much of a 'target' as far as terrorism and such goes)
shop online for brands and sizes you are familiar with
shop local
shop etsy, and such, you get one of a kind, you support mostly stay at home moms trying to make a buck

So your solution is "don't like it--don't shop in malls" Really? Instead of trying to stop the TSA's illegal actions by doing what we can (writing congressmen/senators/state officials and opposing in legal manners this breach of our God given rights) your suggestion is avoid those places where they could be conceivably set up.

You know I remember a poem that went like this "First they came for the Jews, but I was not a jew." We could rewrite it and say "First they came for the airports, but I did not fly. Then they came to the train stations, but I don't take trains. Then they came to the bus stations, so I drove my own car instead. Then they came to the malls, so I shopped online. Finally they came to my door....." Right now we are 3/4 of the way through that little poem.

If I want to go to a local mall and shop I should be able to do so without having my kids and I receiving prison style pat downs. I do not live my life in fear of a terrorist attack, those who do should stay home.

VMI77 wrote: I don't go to theme parks and I've only been to one concert since searches have become routine, and don't plan to attend another, so I only know of these searches by what I read. If you dislike such searches why put up with them? I would suggest to you that people tolerating these searches because they find them to be a "minor inconvenience" is at least part of the reason searches are becoming more intrusive at places like airports, and more pervasive generally. Once people become accustomed to the "minor inconveniences" the next step is always a little easier. Intended or not, searches at theme parks and concerts and airports, etc., are conditioning exercises. Americans are slowly being conditioned to accept violations of their persons and their privacy by just about anyone who appears to be exercising any kind of authority.

If you went to visit a neighbor and he wanted to root through your purse or your diaper bag before you entered his house, would you let him? Why not? What about a relative? Again, why not let a relative look through your bag if he or she wanted --or neighbor, or friend? after all, you're willing to let a stranger look. Would you continue to trade at a grocery store that wanted to have a look through your purse or diaper bag?

Why does Sea World need to search your diaper bag? I suggest the reason is that they've made the calculation that they'll make more money selling food and drinks inside then they'll lose in ticket sales, so essentially you're letting them search your bag for the privilege of giving them even more of your money. I'm one of the ticket sales they sacrificed to get you to spend your money on food and soft drinks.

Apparently my first attempt at a reply to this did not get through some how...so take two. Sea World can legally search my bag because it is their park and their rules. However, they know if they decided to search my and my kids bodies that this would impact ticket sales dramatically. So they limit their searches to poking my bag minimally with a stick. Yes it is annoying, yes it is an inconvenience. But my children and I enjoy the rides and the shows. So it is something I put up with. You certainly don't have to, no one is required by their job to go to Sea World.

The government is supposed to be much much more limited in how, when and where they are permitted to search. I must say there is a world of a difference in Shamu poking my bags with a stick and a federal agent giving me and my kids a prison style pat down. Additionally Shamu won't fine me $11,000 if "I say enough poking of my bag I am going home", the TSA will. We can disagree on whether or not the search at Sea World is worth the diaper poking. Surely we can all agree that patting down a child (or anyone really) in an aggressive manner without any cause whatsoever in any venue is illegal, immoral, and unnecessary.

mamabearCali wrote:

VMI77 wrote: I don't go to theme parks and I've only been to one concert since searches have become routine, and don't plan to attend another, so I only know of these searches by what I read. If you dislike such searches why put up with them? I would suggest to you that people tolerating these searches because they find them to be a "minor inconvenience" is at least part of the reason searches are becoming more intrusive at places like airports, and more pervasive generally. Once people become accustomed to the "minor inconveniences" the next step is always a little easier. Intended or not, searches at theme parks and concerts and airports, etc., are conditioning exercises. Americans are slowly being conditioned to accept violations of their persons and their privacy by just about anyone who appears to be exercising any kind of authority.

If you went to visit a neighbor and he wanted to root through your purse or your diaper bag before you entered his house, would you let him? Why not? What about a relative? Again, why not let a relative look through your bag if he or she wanted --or neighbor, or friend? after all, you're willing to let a stranger look. Would you continue to trade at a grocery store that wanted to have a look through your purse or diaper bag?

Why does Sea World need to search your diaper bag? I suggest the reason is that they've made the calculation that they'll make more money selling food and drinks inside then they'll lose in ticket sales, so essentially you're letting them search your bag for the privilege of giving them even more of your money. I'm one of the ticket sales they sacrificed to get you to spend your money on food and soft drinks.

Apparently my first attempt at a reply to this did not get through some how...so take two. Sea World can legally search my bag because it is their park and their rules. However, they know if they decided to search my and my kids bodies that this would impact ticket sales dramatically. So they limit their searches to poking my bag minimally with a stick. Yes it is annoying, yes it is an inconvenience. But my children and I enjoy the rides and the shows. So it is something I put up with. You certainly don't have to, no one is required by their job to go to Sea World.

The government is supposed to be much much more limited in how, when and where they are permitted to search. I must say there is a world of a difference in Shamu poking my bags with a stick and a federal agent giving me and my kids a prison style pat down. Additionally Shamu won't fine me $11,000 if "I say enough poking of my bag I am going home", the TSA will. We can disagree on whether or not the search at Sea World is worth the diaper poking. Surely we can all agree that patting down a child (or anyone really) in an aggressive manner without any cause whatsoever in any venue is illegal, immoral, and unnecessary.

What I think is needed for security is behavioral profiling, while it may be see as more "1984" I'd rather have trained people and computer programs analyzing me from a distance than some academy flunky with a TSA badge feeling me up.

mamabearCali wrote:So your solution is "don't like it--don't shop in malls" Really? Instead of trying to stop the TSA's illegal actions by doing what we can (writing congressmen/senators/state officials and opposing in legal manners this breach of our God given rights) your suggestion is avoid those places where they could be conceivably set up.

I think the basic problem and conflict here is that the violations that bother you and I and many others who post here don't bother the bulk of the population. Most Americans either think being groped at the airport makes them safe, or they accept it as part of the "price" of air travel. I think the political calculus for politicians is that there is no upside to less security theater: their buddies in the security business will fight the lost revenue; the TSA bureaucracy will fight any reduction in size or power; more people will complain about a perceived loss of safety than now complain about their rights; and if a plane should ever crash under questionable circumstances those who voted for less"security" will be excoriated for being more concerned about the "rights of terrorists" than the lives of Americans.

Also, I see no evidence that our supposed "representatives" care about violations of our rights or the Constitution. I think a very good case can be made that such representatives will pass legislation they know is unconstitutional in order to appear that they have taken action on issues that appeal to the mob. This is one problem with the concept of a "democracy" versus a "Republic" (where actual rule-of-law is superior to the public whim). Most people in this country have no idea what the Constitution means or says and no concept of what it means to live under the rule-of-law. This sentiment is known and pandered to by politicians.

Yes, do what you can to change things, but in the meantime, what else can we do but withhold our consent? On a practical level that usually means avoidance.

mamabearCali wrote:

VMI77 wrote: I don't go to theme parks and I've only been to one concert since searches have become routine, and don't plan to attend another, so I only know of these searches by what I read. If you dislike such searches why put up with them? I would suggest to you that people tolerating these searches because they find them to be a "minor inconvenience" is at least part of the reason searches are becoming more intrusive at places like airports, and more pervasive generally. Once people become accustomed to the "minor inconveniences" the next step is always a little easier. Intended or not, searches at theme parks and concerts and airports, etc., are conditioning exercises. Americans are slowly being conditioned to accept violations of their persons and their privacy by just about anyone who appears to be exercising any kind of authority.

If you went to visit a neighbor and he wanted to root through your purse or your diaper bag before you entered his house, would you let him? Why not? What about a relative? Again, why not let a relative look through your bag if he or she wanted --or neighbor, or friend? after all, you're willing to let a stranger look. Would you continue to trade at a grocery store that wanted to have a look through your purse or diaper bag?

Why does Sea World need to search your diaper bag? I suggest the reason is that they've made the calculation that they'll make more money selling food and drinks inside then they'll lose in ticket sales, so essentially you're letting them search your bag for the privilege of giving them even more of your money. I'm one of the ticket sales they sacrificed to get you to spend your money on food and soft drinks.

Apparently my first attempt at a reply to this did not get through some how...so take two. Sea World can legally search my bag because it is their park and their rules. However, they know if they decided to search my and my kids bodies that this would impact ticket sales dramatically. So they limit their searches to poking my bag minimally with a stick. Yes it is annoying, yes it is an inconvenience. But my children and I enjoy the rides and the shows. So it is something I put up with. You certainly don't have to, no one is required by their job to go to Sea World.

The government is supposed to be much much more limited in how, when and where they are permitted to search. I must say there is a world of a difference in Shamu poking my bags with a stick and a federal agent giving me and my kids a prison style pat down. Additionally Shamu won't fine me $11,000 if "I say enough poking of my bag I am going home", the TSA will. We can disagree on whether or not the search at Sea World is worth the diaper poking. Surely we can all agree that patting down a child (or anyone really) in an aggressive manner without any cause whatsoever in any venue is illegal, immoral, and unnecessary.

You haven't said anything here that I disagree with. What you say about ticket sales is exactly my point: Sea World conduct is limited by their calculation of cost and revenue, and the feedback mechanism that regulates this conduct is probably quick and direct. The TSA doesn't care if you don't fly, in fact, fewer passengers would no doubt make their job more pleasant. There is no direct connection between dollars and their behavior, especially at the margin where people first start to react.

However, I still think you're training your children that you find "Shamu's" searches acceptable and in the long run the threshold of what is "acceptable" will thereby be raised. You may understand the distinction between searches conducted by Sea World and searches conducted by the TSA and pass this comprehension on to your children, but I submit to you that the process helps accommodate the bulk of the population to being searched, and over time will lead to more intrusive searches by both Sea World and the government.