TSA and venues other than airports

[Dave2]

Well it is not so hypothetical now...they are going to bus stations, train stations, metro stations, and High School Proms apparently.

High School proms? Really?!? How are they justifying that one?

It's more unnecessary government spending by the Obama administration.

That's not the point... If there's a park ranger trying to search me as I go into Kroger, I'll be asking him when Plano became federal park lands. Even though I disagree with it, I can understand the Transportation Security Administration claiming jurisdiction over busses and trains because those are both forms of public transportation. A high school prom is not a form of public transportation, so they should have about as much authority as a Zimbabwean Horse Inspector. The question is not where they get their funding from, but where they get the authority to do anything at a prom.

[SewTexas]

well, according to the article, they got their authority from the Judge. I'm not saying I like this...this is part of the reason I homeschool my kids...but understand that these kids often bring alcohol into the dances. Apparently, there had been problems at the school, thus the security co already on the premises. The school felt the kids needed to be searched, the judge didn't disagree with that, instead told a private company how to do business...who to hire and pay! and no one here has mentioned it in those terms either! none of the kids said they were harmed after the TSA certified person was brought on either...and I can't find where it was proven that anything actually happened before that, just that the girls said so. Sorry, I'm not saying anything didn't happen, but I'm also not saying something did....I've seen lives damaged because a girl got mad at someone for some reason and cried "foul".

[The Mad Moderate]

Going through this thread reminded me of my high School graduation in 2005. We the students were searched in a manner consistent with the current TSA "Regulations" I do not know what they were looking for but thinking back it seemed like overkill considering none of the parents or others were searched so extensively only the students. It was very invasive and if you protested you were told you would not receive your diploma. None of us were very happy about it.

[jordanmills]

Well we need to start doing something about it. What are the chances of a county electing a sheriff who would post deputies and arrest these perverts on sight?

On a more personal note, why are people tolerating their friends and family becoming enemies of american citizens? I know that if anyone in my family tried to get on at the TSA, they'd be completely cut off. Does anyone even personally KNOW someone employed by the terrorists?

[speedsix]

Going through this thread reminded me of my high School graduation in 2005. We the students were searched in a manner consistent with the current TSA "Regulations" I do not know what they were looking for but thinking back it seemed like overkill considering none of the parents or others were searched so extensively only the students. It was very invasive and if you protested you were told you would not receive your diploma. None of us were very happy about it.

...when I graduated in 1967, if some one had attempted such an intimate search on either boy or girl, they would have been laid out on the floor in about 2 seconds...we stood up for ourselves and each other back then...I miss those days...

[SewTexas]

looks like something is going to be done about it, they said something on the news about changing the way younger kids are checked? anyone see that?

also, I probably need to apologize, I think I got a bit..stronger? in my words than I intended. I have had a very difficult week and I think I may have shown it in this thread. I apologize for that. I'm gonna so sewing today and relax.

[speedsix]

...I was just having that conversation with a friend yesterday...ALL of us are under more stress than is fair...and showing it from time to time...we'll get over it...or stronger, don't know which...it's the times we live in...not much to laugh about...

[VMI77]

Also, I'm not all that concerned about whether proxy search evidence would be admissible in court, though in the context I'm suggesting I don't see why it wouldn't be. If Sea World found someone in possession of something illegal, why wouldn't it be admissible? Are you saying that if Sea World discovered a baggie full of illegal drugs in someone's diaper bag and informed the police, they wouldn't be arrested and tried on the evidence discovered by Sea World? I'm not objecting to these kinds of searches because they might reveal evidence of a crime, I'm objecting because they are fixtures of a police state, and I don't want to have to show "my papers" and be subject to searches wherever I go.

I didn't say that at all. But Sea World is not acting on LE's behalf. Therefore the evidence is perfectly admissible. If, however, LE required Sea World to search the bag and Sea World found something, then it would be inadmissible because they were acting as LE's agents.

Again, I'm not talking about a venue acting "on behalf" of law enforcement --the subterfuge is not so directly transparent. I'm saying that if they want to skirt legal restrictions on law enforcement the Feds have methods of getting venues like this to conduct searches. This process isn't hypothetical --it's happening right now in my industry. I've explained above how it's done. They haven't yet mandated searches, but they do mandate all kinds of security, and they (the government proxies) gather evidence without search warrants or probable cause (and the number and scope of their fishing expeditions are increasing exponentially). Again, my concern is about being searched everywhere, the social climate that produces, and the violation of my right to go about my lawful business without interference --I don't care whether or not evidence from the searches is admissible or inadmissible.

If they wanted to do this for theme parks, this is how they'd do it: 1) go to the industry group for theme parks, or get one created in the interest of "public safety"; 2) get the industry group to create "safety" regulations for their members (which start out as "guidelines"); 3) make participation in the group a requirement to be a "certified safe" facility, or whatever --the purpose being to make operating outside the group difficult or impossible; 4) get the group to impose fines for those members violating the group's regulations; 5) get the group to pass various measures desired by the Feds using various types of coercion and incentives. This basic process was accomplished in my industry in less than ten years. The proxy is NERC and the boss is FERC (all the more significant because ERCOT is not synchronously interconnected with the rest of the country and therefore not under FERC regulatory jurisdiction, something FERC has wanted to change for a long time).

[McKnife]

TSA anti-groping bill at peril of dying in Texas House
http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/06/24 ... peril.html

I didn't think bills could die in Special Session. I thought they had to be voted yes or no. Can someone clarify for me?

[terryg]

My concern with the current special session bill is that there is no mention of the nudie scanners. Originally, IIRC, there was an anti pat down bill and an anti nudie scanner bill. f it were to pass, could the TSA not simply say: "Ok fine, no more opting out of the scanners - everybody must go through ..."?

[Dave2]

My concern with the current special session bill is that there is no mention of the nudie scanners. Originally, IIRC, there was an anti pat down bill and an anti nudie scanner bill. f it were to pass, could the TSA not simply say: "Ok fine, no more opting out of the scanners - everybody must go through ..."?

They already allow exceptions for people who receive above a certain dose of radiation, and I keep reading these studies about how cell phones are irradiating our heads, so maybe I can show them my cell phone bill and get a pass?

(tongue only partially in cheek, because I haven't compared the numbers yet)

[TLE2]

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

We got scared. Scared people give up their rights in order to feel safe. When we, as a country, feel safe again, police powers in every form will be curtailed.

I don't think I'll last that long, but I pray that it will happen.

We cannot make it happen until we can show the people/sheeple/whatever you word is/ that they are now safe. That these violations are not necessary and are wrong.

Just my 2 cents (sorry I'm late to the party, I was out of town: I flew. Went thru the naked scanner, then got picked out of the line at the gate, for a further search. I felt special.)

[mamabearCali]

Just so that yall are aware. The house speaker is playing games and political speak. The bill that would at least make a statement if not actually do something to stem the tide of the TSA groping is on the rocks. I can and have called, but since some of yall live in TX you might get more traction than I do. This is important and even if it does not do anything more than bring the issue to the courts and the limelight it would be worth it. So think about it yall--after all they are not just going to be at the airports anymore, but bus station, and train stations and God knows where else. So it will become harder and harder to avoid the TSA gropings if we don't stop it somewhere.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/7625855.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[tacticool]

Just so that yall are aware. The house speaker is playing games and political speak. The bill that would at least make a statement if not actually do something to stem the tide of the TSA groping is on the rocks. I can and have called, but since some of yall live in TX you might get more traction than I do. This is important and even if it does not do anything more than bring the issue to the courts and the limelight it would be worth it. So think about it yall--after all they are not just going to be at the airports anymore, but bus station, and train stations and God knows where else. So it will become harder and harder to avoid the TSA gropings if we don't stop it somewhere.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/7625855.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Any politician who would side with rapists and other criminals by keeping college students and professors disarmed, would probably side with perverts who sexually assault little children and the elderly.

[The Mad Moderate]

Just so that yall are aware. The house speaker is playing games and political speak. The bill that would at least make a statement if not actually do something to stem the tide of the TSA groping is on the rocks. I can and have called, but since some of yall live in TX you might get more traction than I do. This is important and even if it does not do anything more than bring the issue to the courts and the limelight it would be worth it. So think about it yall--after all they are not just going to be at the airports anymore, but bus station, and train stations and God knows where else. So it will become harder and harder to avoid the TSA gropings if we don't stop it somewhere.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/7625855.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Any politician who would side with rapists and other criminals by keeping college students and professors disarmed, would probably side with perverts who sexually assault little children and the elderly.

I think calling TSA agents 'perverts" is going too far. While I am not naive and do know there are some in that job who get a sick pleasure from what that do many are doing their job and getting no pleasure from it whatsoever in fact if it was me in their shoes I would feel as uncomfortable as the people receiving the pat down. But to my original point a blanket statement calling them all perverts is too far.