by Michael Rozeff, LewRockwell.com
I’ve been thinking about the horrid situation at airports for weeks, and before that for even more months
Flyers now have the option enforced against them of either being scanned or groped. What a choice!
I haven’t flown in an airplane for years now. The last time was when I attended a conference at the Mises Institute in Alabama. I have been lucky. I didn’t need to fly or want to fly, but I still may feel I have to, and I am still deeply troubled by the scanning and groping. Both are despicable.
What I wish is that all flyers would organize and boycott all flying, or organize sit-down strikes at all the airports on a given day and hour, or organize some sort of widespread protest action or actions at specific times so as to make known their true inner feelings.
This hope banks on the notion that people now put up with the scanning and groping because they feel they have no alternative as individuals. I may be wrong. They may support it or feel it’s in their safety interest. I don’t know, but I can only express my own personal distaste for what air travel has come to and hope that someone better equipped to organize protests than I will do so. Such protests should be accompanied by publicized demands to end this travesty.
Stop it! Stop it now! Stop searching every traveler! Stop searching innocent people!
Stop searches that have no reasonable basis. Stop searches that are based only on one criterion: that the person is a traveler. What kind of reasonable basis for a search is that? None whatsoever! It is totally unreasonable to suspect everyone! It is totally unreasonable to suspect everyone who is a traveler. It’s unreasonable for the obvious reason that we all know that not one person in sixty million is a terrorist, and not one in six hundred million is at the point of trying to board a plane with an explosive device hidden on his person.
Groping and scanning are both searches. Both are equally vile. Both are unreasonable searches. Both need to be rejected.
Why should I submit to a search? What have I done to merit that? What criminal record have I accumulated in my 70 years? When have I uttered a threat against an airline? When have I encouraged anyone to blow up an airplane?
Where’s the probable cause? Where’s the reasonable basis to grope me, frisk me, x-ray me, or otherwise invade my person or property? There is none.
Where’s the warrant obtained from a judge? There is none.
It’s totally ridiculous to be searching me. I won’t stand for it. I am being assumed to be a criminal suspect for no good reason whatsoever. The people engaging in the criminal behavior are the searchers in this case, not the searchees.
I speak personally, but of course the same is true of millions upon millions of other people. What have they done to merit a search? Absolutely nothing. Nada.
There is such a thing as a U.S. Constitution, although adherence to it is zilch. It once meant something, and the government still claims it means something. What a bunch of liars and hypocrites they are. They deserve no respect. They deserve nothing but scorn. How can they conduct such searches of millions of innocent people in the face of the constitutional language?
The Fourth Amendment reads
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
There is no ambiguity here. The right to be secure in my person shall not be violated. Period. It doesn’t say that airports are an exception. Or that public roads are an exception. Or that public spaces are an exception. There are no exceptions listed.
If exceptions are allowed, such as supposedly to create safe air travel, then similar exceptions can be allowed for rail, bus, auto, and pedestrian traffic anywhere, anytime, and at virtually any place. Police state, folks. That’s what we’re talking about. Police state. We’ve got it. Now. Here and now. Don’t look now, it’s here already.
Am I an expert on the case law of searches? Have I read all the pertinent Supreme Court cases that develop exceptions and procedures and interpret the Constitution? No. I won’t waste any more time on such a fruitless endeavor. I did that for the case of America’s money. I did that in excruciating detail over the course of two solid months. I found, as have others before me, that the Supreme Court is perfectly capable of making things up as they go along. They have twisted the clear constitutional language to suit themselves and their own ideas. We cannot quietly submit to what the Supreme Court says. We must protest when conscience and reason tell us that the Court is in the wrong.
I demand the termination of these unreasonable searches and I urge you to demand the same. Boycott air travel, or else dream up some better manner of protest than I can think of. But don’t sit still for this. It’s not right, and you know it’s not right. It’s not lawful, and you know it’s not lawful. It’s mass insanity, and you know it’s mass insanity.
Michael S. Rozeff [send him mail] is a retired Professor of Finance living in East Amherst, New York. He is the author of the free e-book Essays on American Empire.
Copyright © 2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
This is one of the reasons why many push for the privatization of everything. There is a widely held belief that we do not have the right to exercise our rights when it comes to private privilege, and flying is considered such a privilege. In order to enjoy that privilege, you must forfeit some rights “voluntarily” or be denied that privilege. The assumption is that you know this, are still getting in line for the privilege of flying, and so you have, though your actions, consented to participate, and will comply with what is asked. Therefore, you’re rights are not really being violated, you have given them up!
Now, if this were public property and a public service for which you had the right to enjoy. Then you would not need forgo your 4th Amendment rights. But among those who cherish their right, “public” anything is usually frowned upon. This presents a serious paradox.
One might fully respect private property and admit that a privately owned business (albeit open to the public) may conduct itself and treat its customers any way it sees fit. The TSA isn’t private, but due to government mandate, airlines and airports are required to submit their customers to the TSA. So, they do or else they face being shutdown. We, desirous of the service, submit as well.
If people would in fact show more civil disobedience and engage in peaceful demonstrations as suggested in this article. Things would change. But it must be a majority of the people. That is not likely to happen any time soon because we have this other widely held odd belief that “majority rules” and minorities or special interests are bad. So, a demonstration of a small number of people is always looked upon with ire and generally ignored or forcibly ended. This is what progressives have dealt with for years and now, ironically, conservatives are facing the very same thing. If the stakes weren’t so high, I would find that very amusing indeed.
I suggest that those going through the scanners wear messages under their shirts.
Cut out aluminum foil letters and paste on white typing paper.
“Fu** You for Looking!” will draw media attention. No laws broken; just embarrassing to the TSA.
Civil disobedience that works!
Harry Statel
http://harrystatel.com/?p=1694
This is one of the reasons why many push for the privatization of everything. There is a widely held belief that we do not have the right to exercise our rights when it comes to private privilege, and flying is considered such a privilege. In order to enjoy that privilege, you must forfeit some rights “voluntarily” or be denied that privilege. The assumption is that you know this, are still getting in line for the privilege of flying, and so you have, though your actions, consented to participate, and will comply with what is asked. Therefore, you’re rights are not really being violated, you have given them up!
Now, if this were public property and a public service for which you had the right to enjoy. Then you would not need forgo your 4th Amendment rights. But among those who cherish their right, “public” anything is usually frowned upon. This presents a serious paradox.
One might fully respect private property and admit that a privately owned business (albeit open to the public) may conduct itself and treat its customers any way it sees fit. The TSA isn’t private, but due to government mandate, airlines and airports are required to submit their customers to the TSA. So, they do or else they face being shutdown. We, desirous of the service, submit as well.
If people would in fact show more civil disobedience and engage in peaceful demonstrations as suggested in this article. Things would change. But it must be a majority of the people. That is not likely to happen any time soon because we have this other widely held odd belief that “majority rules” and minorities or special interests are bad. So, a demonstration of a small number of people is always looked upon with ire and generally ignored or forcibly ended. This is what progressives have dealt with for years and now, ironically, conservatives are facing the very same thing. If the stakes weren’t so high, I would find that very amusing indeed.
I suggest that those going through the scanners wear messages under their shirts.
Cut out aluminum foil letters and paste on white typing paper.
“Fu** You for Looking!” will draw media attention. No laws broken; just embarrassing to the TSA.
Civil disobedience that works!
Harry Statel http://harrystatel.com/?p=1694
I suggest that those going through the scanners wear messages under their shirts.
Cut out aluminum foil letters and paste on white typing paper.
“Fu** You for Looking!” will draw media attention. No laws broken; just embarrassing to the TSA.
Civil disobedience that works!
There has got to be a website that sells something like that.
Do you have a solution for protecting us from terrorists? I'd rather be groped than be blown up.
you are a moron
We've already found the solution! Lock the cockpit doors=no hijacking. Scan bags for bombs=no bombs. It's plain and simple.
The things they do now are just to maintain a culture of fear and intimidation. It's the beginning of fascism.
@ Olap Reporter
Violating our civil liberties (and the Constitution!) in the name of "protection" is as much of a violation of our lives as blowing us up; just with less blood.
Our government cannot simply do whatever it pleases just because it says it's for protection. Remember what BEN FRANKLIN said, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." And what THOMAS JEFFERSON said, "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."
I believe the fourth amendment says that unreasonable searches are not allowed. Is it really unreasonable to make sure people are not carrying explosives before they get on a plane?
This is one I really don't get that much other than the full body porno viewer that they got. I would say that that is bullshit in itself but people need to be searched before getting on a plane.
It does! But is that all it says?
A lot of people seem to separate the 4th into sections as if each part was not dependent or intertwined with the other.
No unreasonable searches are allowed by the federal government. How is that done? By not allowing warrants without "probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
1. The TSA is not issuing search warrants.
2. Where in the Constitution is the TSA even authorized?
3. Yes, searches need to be done to ensure security, but do the feds have the authority to do so? I think not.
4. More important to our security is the protection of our 2nd amendment rights – even while traveling.
Then the federal government has no right to search your bags either? The whole reason why they can search your bags is that a person agrees to have their bags searched in order to be allowed on the plane. As far as I know, they can't search your bags without you giving permission first. The fourth amendment may not apply because the government isn't attempting to search your stuff without your consent first.
no way. not even close.
The feds are requiring you to submit to a search, without warrant, for conducting business with a private entity – and an organization that is constitutionally dubious at best, is doing the searching.
This would be like the feds telling you that you need to submit to a search to enter a grocery store.
The 4th is pretty straightforward – the magistrate (government) can determine what is and is not reasonable. But they would still need to issue a warrant and it would also have to be based on probable cause – supported by oath or affirmation. Not just a random checkpoint for every person. Doing so is making the claim that EVERY person is a suspected criminal – until proven innocent.
No one can say that probable cause has been met simply for getting on a plane. That's absurd, at best. Criminal, is more like it.
You make a good point but what about bags. Are you going to say that bags can't be searched either? I'm sure bags fall into the same catagory as those body scanners.
The plane is private property but that plane can be used as a deadly weapon. Doesn't the government have a responsibility to ensure that can't be misused or hijacked which is another way of saying 'stolen'. Ain't they protecting the property rights of the airliner by making sure thieves can't get aboard?
I read the 4th, and find no such exceptions….
And as you so rightly alluded to below – we would probably be better off with private security anyway…
On the other hand, even if you did give permission you may still have to get a search warrant since it says the federal government can't search anything without a warrant.
based on probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.
now the states might be able to implement such things based on their own constitutions, or it would be a market response where the airlines themselves might provide for this, or far better security.
I actually wonder if they treated the plane like any other piece of private property if security would improve. It seems terrorist don't hijack buses. Perhaps it is because buses ain't regulated like airlines are.
Interstate buses have their own bus terminals so perhaps airlines should have their own terminals that they pay for themselves.
yeah, I am definitely with you there. If you want to ruin something, hand it over to DC – including security.
I kind of wonder if the airports are not creating their own honey for the fly (terrorist) by being so closely connected to the government. The terrorist see it as attacking the government while bus terminals are complete private propoperty. To bomb a bus terminal isn't the same as bombing an airline since it is connected to the government itself. Its not seen as a victory against the American 'empire' so they have less motive to do so.
To be honest some of the searching is pissing me off. I've just heard on the radio that they allow sexual organs breast and balls to be searched with palms instead of the back of your hand. It makes me wonder who and why are they making these rules the way they are.
@Olap: You are hundreds, if not thousands of times more likely to be kill in your car on the way to the airport than being in a terrorist bombing.
You have zero chance of being bombed in the car driving to the airport by a terrorist organization.
I was at an airport recently to pick up my grandma. I got to watch the people going in and out and getting searched. It's a small airport so things weren't to bad, but still bags had to be scanned, people had to take off their shoes; it was humiliating. If they do that at a small airport I hate to see what they do at a big one. I'd hate to have to go through that and the thought of my grandma going through that was horrifying.
I know that the searches and stuff are put in place for our own protection because 9-11 proved that anybody can get onto an airplane with a bomb, but really is all that necessary. Also if anybody can get onto a plane with a bomb then anybody can set car bombs. A few years ago we had a string on car bombs being set because they were upset with the company for the layoff.
no one got onto a plane in 9-11 with a bomb. they threatened that they had a bomb. what's next, make sure no one speaks on a plane? because that's all it took on 9/11, that and a couple of box-cutters.