A Full Body Scan of American Corruption

[98valk]

http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2010/11/full-body-scan-of-american-corruption.html


Body scanners are an obvious breach of civil liberties—a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment (unlawful search and seizure) and the rule of probable cause . . . unless we are going to redefine “probable cause” as meaning all airplane passengers by definition are likely engaged in criminal activity, and therefore there is probable cause to essentially strip-search each and every one of them.

Why are they starting to use these on (500 purchased so far) mobile units that will roam the streets and carry even more danger to the public in terms of health? etc etc.

It is indisputably legal—Chertoff is not breaking any law, as far as I know. Yet what he is doing is indisputably immoral and despicable nevertheless—Chertoff is preying on the citizenry’s fear and desire for impossible standard of safety, in order to enrich himself.

[valkmc]

http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2010/11/full-body-scan-of-american-corruption.html


Body scanners are an obvious breach of civil liberties—a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment (unlawful search and seizure) and the rule of probable cause . . . unless we are going to redefine “probable cause” as meaning all airplane passengers by definition are likely engaged in criminal activity, and therefore there is probable cause to essentially strip-search each and every one of them.

Why are they starting to use these on (500 purchased so far) mobile units that will roam the streets and carry even more danger to the public in terms of health? etc etc.

It is indisputably legal—Chertoff is not breaking any law, as far as I know. Yet what he is doing is indisputably immoral and despicable nevertheless—Chertoff is preying on the citizenry’s fear and desire for impossible standard of safety, in order to enrich himself.

I am not seeing the 4th amendment violation, no one has to get on an airplane owned by a private company.....If anyone has a legitimate complaint it is the airlines.....should our government be telling them how to run their operation? I will not fly unless it is an extreme emergency, I don't care about a scanner but do care about how safe the plane is when I get on it. If some nut case wants to screw up a flight he will find away.

[ricoman]

Intersting stuff here.
I disagree that body scanners are "an obvious breach of civil liberties".
It is my choice to fly, not any god-given right. If I don't want to be subjected to a body scan-guess what-I do not have to fly. I wonder how many passengers are scanned out of the total number who fly?
The Gonzalo Lira blog is intersting also. He asks "how many people died of airplane terrorism in 2009?" I am curious if he has (would) consider asking the same of 2001 if body scanners had been used. He seems to really resent the fact that Michael Chertoff is making (may be making) serious money from the sale of the scanners. So what? Should any industry and/or its representatives not make money from a product? Tell that to your grocer, computer company, furniture store,or even your insurance agent. Seems to me that's why any of us are in business.
His claim that the technology is unsafe was based on flawed data collected by people with an axe to grind against it- not collected by a dis-interested party. He states one in a million odds of a fatal consequence to the scan will result in 48000 deaths out of the 2.4 million Thanksgiving flyers. Not all passengers are scanned. His use of statistics to suit his needs and support his viewpoint are no better than what he rails against.
Now, having gotten all that off my chest, I wonder if it realy is proper and ethical for Chertoff to get such a windfall? It is no different that the retiring General becoming a lobbyist/spokesperson for the company who's military products he authorized purchase of during his time in the military.
I for one would like to see a totally impartial review/commentary on the safety of a body scanner, as opposed to one based on little or no real facts.
Meanwhile, if you don't want to be scanned or patted down, remember-it is your choice to fly, not your right. If you don't want to take a driver license test-the same holds true. If you don't want to use a wood bat-don't think about playing major league ball. It's all about choice.

[SANDMAN5]

Like I said....I don't fly anywhere, at least I ain't 'flied' in almost 20 years, so
it don't matter to me personally. My problem with it is the possiblity...make
that probability that pictures of somebody's unmentionables WILL end up on
the internet or available for sale at fine establishments elsewhere. If you don't
want your picture taken, you can let someone of the same sex as you run
their hands all over you...not a very exciting idea to me. Raising a teenager is
hard enough nowadays (been there, done that) w/o having to worry about their
sexploitation in some way. Some might argue that the pictures are blurry.....how
long before THEY decide to make the images a little cleaner...for safety's sake, of
course. Or, you could stand there and watch some woman you've never met feel
your daughter's 'stuff', even if it is through her clothes. Would you stand by while
her boyfriend did that? Or let some 'guy' manhandle your son. Is that a touch of
lipstick that guy's wearing? Safety is important, I agree. But I can't see all this
stuff making us any safer. The bad guys will just work around it....and stand by
and laugh at us for going through it. YMMV.

[Dave Ritsema]

Yawn....... If Y'all enjoyed talking about motorcycles as much as this crap this might turn into.....gasp...a motorcycle forum! 

[czuch]

I scan the road when ride my Valkyrie.
 I'll fly the friendly skies of Valkyrie before all others. I flew in the Navy and just dont have anywhere to go that way now.
I do think this is sort of overblown. Makes me wonder what the "smokescreen" is all about.

[John Schmidt]

My neighbor is the top person in the local immigration service office, located at Orlando Int'l. a/p. We were talking about the scanners and the issue of an image ending up on the internet. He told me at the Orlando a/p there is no way to save or transfer any images. He couldn't speak for any other locations in the US, but assumes they are operated much the same way since the equipment is the same in most cases. I have no idea if that's true or not, just passing on what I was told.

[elraque]

http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2010/11/full-body-scan-of-american-corruption.html


Body scanners are an obvious breach of civil liberties—a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment (unlawful search and seizure) and the rule of probable cause . . . unless we are going to redefine “probable cause” as meaning all airplane passengers by definition are likely engaged in criminal activity, and therefore there is probable cause to essentially strip-search each and every one of them.

Why are they starting to use these on (500 purchased so far) mobile units that will roam the streets and carry even more danger to the public in terms of health? etc etc.

It is indisputably legal—Chertoff is not breaking any law, as far as I know. Yet what he is doing is indisputably immoral and despicable nevertheless—Chertoff is preying on the citizenry’s fear and desire for impossible standard of safety, in order to enrich himself.

Here's the fourth amendment:
"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."

The body scanners and/or "freedom gropes" are violations of every clause of this amendment. My person is not secure when it is being scanned or groped. No warrant has been issued, there is no probable cause, there is no particular description of the place to be searched nor the persons or things to be seezed. The government and its agents are expressly prohibited from doing these searches by the fourth amendment. Consequently, I choose freedom over a "sense of temporary security." I choose not to fly until and unless the policy changes. My fourth amendment rights are more important than the government's usurped and self-proclaimed "need" to sexually violate me (and especially my family).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[big turkey]

Obvious Infringement on our rights.

But some people complain about anything.

I heard a new Congress Woman says she wants to wear a hat on the Floor of the Congress.

This is not allowed and now of all the things we have to get on with she is worried about

wearing a hat.

People are some strange creatures for sure.

Planes will still be attacked, it would be easier to attack a Bus or Train, but Al Qaida has made them

a symbol of thier Victory on 911.

So on and on it goes and soon no one will have rights to do anything and there will be no

motorcycle forum, because it won't be needed, because that right will be gone as well.

So these discussions are relevant.

Al

[ricoman]

these posts are an interesting cross section of opinions.
your 4th ammendment rights are NOT being violated by a search/scan as a prerequisit of something you have a choice to do. period
I pat down is not "sexually violating" you and/or your family-don't get into the game if you will not play by the rules. Somebody explain how the random pat down by a person with sterile gloves on a total stranger, in complete view of others, is a sexual violation. That is total crap. I wonder about the homophobic reaction by so many to being "touched" by a member of the same sex. Ever had a prostate exam? Ever had a pap smear? Do you really believe the TSA employees go to work hoping they can grope someone? That job does not pay enough to get me excited and I doubt it has any other effect on those who must do it. Think about the disgusting people you see on a plane, the grossly obese, the completely filthy, the ones you pray won't sit next to you because they stink. How can you believe a pat down of them is a sexual violation?  Or is even something someone would want to do? I would expect to see TSA employees gag or throw up after having to put their hands on many people of those types.
Get a grip-if you don't like the water-don't swim in it.

[FryeVRCCDS0067]

My neighbor is the top person in the local immigration service office, located at Orlando Int'l. a/p. We were talking about the scanners and the issue of an image ending up on the internet. He told me at the Orlando a/p there is no way to save or transfer any images. He couldn't speak for any other locations in the US, but assumes they are operated much the same way since the equipment is the same in most cases. I have no idea if that's true or not, just passing on what I was told.

I'd think it would be easy enough for the operator to take a phone pic of the screen. Then he/she could text it anywhere. Probably won't be a big deal till it happens to a celebrity or politician. Sure hope I don't open an "E" mail someday to find Nancy Pelosi's scanned naked pic traveling all over the world ruining everyone's day.

As a certain well known VRCC member would say. Not Zesty!

[Trynt]

This nation has young men fighting, dying and being horribly wounded in that  sh**hole Afghanistan in an effort to thwart the barbarians that are trying to kill us.  Yet the flying public can't be troubled to submit to a scanning or god forbid, a frisking in an effort to save their own lives. Ever hear of shared sacrifice?  What a pathetic, spoiled lot we've become when we can't  be inconvenienced and perhaps embarrassed in an effort to save lives. Consider the soldier that comes home in a box or without a limb and then cry me a river.

Its fine to question the TSA's effectiveness, the safety of the radiation, or the wisdom of the program. But don't whine about how it infringes on your dignity. If you truly believe that it violates your liberties, or is dangerous, or ineffective, man up and don't fly.

That's just my opinion, take it or leave it.

[Chattanooga Mark]

Heard a great comment this morning regarding these scanners. We allow anyone to run, jump, swim, fly or  tunnel into our country but we treat those here as criminals.

Telling, very telling,

Mark

[elraque]

I have chosen not to fly, because to do so would require me to give up my fourth amendment rights.

My rights are far more important to me than the temporary (and false) sense of security that "MIGHT" come from the illegal (warrantless and unwarranted) search.

It has been quoted before and deserves to be quoted again: "He that would give up his freedom for a temporary sense of security deserves neither." Charlton Heston followed up with: "And they usually wind up losing both."

I'm not willing to give up either one. Because I AM AN AMERICAN CITIZEN -- NOT a terrorist and NOT a criminal. I demand to be treated by the government that serves me as the CITIZEN that I am, and not as the terrorist and criminal that I am not.

So I choose not to play their silly (and perverted) game.

[Willow]

Yet the flying public can't be troubled to submit to a scanning or god forbid, a frisking in an effort to save their own lives. Ever hear of shared sacrifice?  What a pathetic, spoiled lot we've become
... man up and don't fly.  

The point is we don't believe the pathic, meaningless actions of the TSA do anything to save any lives. We believe strongly that these same pathetic, meaningless actions are an infringement of our rights and our dignity.

"Man up?"  Really, Trynt, I'm sure you didn't think about that before you said it.  People who don't agree with us are not necessarily giving up their manhood.  Otherwise, those of us on this side might be sayoing you should man up and stand up for what's right.

Keep your mind at least open enough to see that there just might be another valid viewpoint.

[Jess from VA]

Whether or not these procedures are overkill, they are no 4th Amendment violation.  Knowing they are required as a prerequisite to fly, your purchase of a ticket and queuing up for security is clear "consent" to the search of your person.... however reluctant you may feel about it.  You do not have to fly.  If you choose to fly you DO consent to be searched. 

Wait till the first plane goes down because some freak had three pounds of Semtex/C4 up his rectum.

 

[Trynt]

Yet the flying public can't be troubled to submit to a scanning or god forbid, a frisking in an effort to save their own lives. Ever hear of shared sacrifice?  What a pathetic, spoiled lot we've become
... man up and don't fly.  

The point is we don't believe the pathic, meaningless actions of the TSA do anything to save any lives. We believe strongly that these same pathetic, meaningless actions are an infringement of our rights and our dignity.

"Man up?"  Really, Trynt, I'm sure you didn't think about that before you said it.  People who don't agree with us are not necessarily giving up their manhood.  Otherwise, those of us on this side might be sayoing you should man up and stand up for what's right.

Keep your mind at least open enough to see that there just might be another valid viewpoint.

As I said. "That's just my opinion, take it or leave it." that by implication recognizes there are views other than mine and I don't expect you all to agree.  As far as the "man up", I was urging those  who have strong feelings about this topic to refuse to submit to these perceived indignities by not flying. I for one would not put myself in a position where I thought I was likely to suffer the abuse of fools.  

[98valk]

Whether or not these procedures are overkill, they are no 4th Amendment violation.  Knowing they are required as a prerequisite to fly, your purchase of a ticket and queuing up for security is clear "consent" to the search of your person.... however reluctant you may feel about it.  You do not have to fly.  If you choose to fly you DO consent to be searched. 

Wait till the first plane goes down because some freak had three pounds of Semtex/C4 up his rectum.

The Right To Travel

As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

Freedom of movement under United States law is governed primarily by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution states, "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States." As far back as the circuit court ruling in Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823), the Supreme Court recognized freedom of movement as a fundamental Constitutional right. In Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the Court defined freedom of movement as "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them."[1] However, the Supreme Court did not invest the federal government with the authority to protect freedom of movement. Under the "privileges and immunities" clause, this authority was given to the states, a position the Court held consistently through the years in cases such as Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 418 (1871), the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873) and United States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883).[2][3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law

[Jess from VA]

Yes the Supremes have long found there to be a right to travel (or right of movement between States) in the US Const.  However, there is no constitutional right to fly..... at this time. 

[SANDMAN5]

Some are missing the point a little...at least of my post. IF I were going to fly,
it wouldn't bother me to be scanned. The radiation is everywhere we go, anyway.
I DO NOT in any way, shape, form or fashion want some guy to feel of me just
because I want to get on a plane. Dr visits are a completely different subject.
My biggest concern is for privacy (pictures on the internet, I believe it WILL
happen...and I hope I'm wrong) and the "abuse" of the pat downs, which has
probably already happened, at least in some instances. Tell me, convince me,
that NONE of those doing the same-sex pat downs are not getting their jollies!
And again I say, the bad guys won't/don't have to put up with it. They just get
to laugh at us for doing it. YMMV

[elraque]

I think that the ones getting their jollies are the terrorists.

All they have to do is (figuratively) shout "BOO!" and all of America begins jumping at shadows (and allowing strangers to touch us in intimate places. And doing other ridiculous, outrageous and ineffective things).

Indeed, the terrorists have won. They have been successful in their attempt to fundamentally change America. (Hey, wait a minute. Wasn't that one of the campaign promises in the last presidential election?!! Hmm.... )

[fudgie]

*Rant* I really do not believe they are getting their 'jollies' as you all say. I get to feel men and women all the time. Its done on a professional basis. Do you really think they will remember you after doing a few hundred people? I cant. If they do, so what? Big whoop. You should have more to worry about then 'oh my another person saw my junk'. The way alot of people on here have been bitching lately I think could use a good 'squeeze' and maybe they will lighten up.  Or hit some bike rallies and let you hair down. I'm sure you'll see alot of nekkid men and women.

[SANDMAN5]

Whether or not they 'remember' me is irrelevant. I'd remember it. 

[fudgie]

Whether or not they 'remember' me is irrelevant. I'd remember it. 

I dont think i could. I been to a few t/t bars and cant remember all them in my face dances. 

[98valk]

*Rant* I really do not believe they are getting their 'jollies' as you all say. I get to feel men and women all the time. Its done on a professional basis. Do you really think they will remember you after doing a few hundred people? I cant. If they do, so what? Big whoop. You should have more to worry about then 'oh my another person saw my junk'. The way alot of people on here have been bitching lately I think could use a good 'squeeze' and maybe they will lighten up.  Or hit some bike rallies and let you hair down. I'm sure you'll see alot of nekkid men and women.

u are trained as a "medical professional" and "first responder" they are not. U do a disservice to yourself and all medical people by equating the two as the same. Although I'm sure u have heard how some doctors and nurses do talk about certain patients, more so now in todays society.
most of them before their TSA job were only capable of being a bagger at the checkout line. now they are checking bags in the line.

[SANDMAN5]

I dont think i could. I been to a few t/t bars and cant remember all them in my face dances. 

Yeah, but remember. At the airport men check men. Hopefully you didn't go to
the wrong kind of bar!!

[Oyeaa]

This nation has young men fighting, dying and being horribly wounded in that  sh**hole Afghanistan in an effort to thwart the barbarians that are trying to kill us.  Yet the flying public can't be troubled to submit to a scanning or god forbid, a frisking in an effort to save their own lives. Ever hear of shared sacrifice?  What a pathetic, spoiled lot we've become when we can't  be inconvenienced and perhaps embarrassed in an effort to save lives. Consider the soldier that comes home in a box or without a limb and then cry me a river.

Its fine to question the TSA's effectiveness, the safety of the radiation, or the wisdom of the program. But don't whine about how it infringes on your dignity. If you truly believe that it violates your liberties, or is dangerous, or ineffective, man up and don't fly.

That just my opinion, take it or leave it.

Ditto.  Two Thumbs up. 

[fudgie]

*Rant* I really do not believe they are getting their 'jollies' as you all say. I get to feel men and women all the time. Its done on a professional basis. Do you really think they will remember you after doing a few hundred people? I cant. If they do, so what? Big whoop. You should have more to worry about then 'oh my another person saw my junk'. The way alot of people on here have been bitching lately I think could use a good 'squeeze' and maybe they will lighten up.  Or hit some bike rallies and let you hair down. I'm sure you'll see alot of nekkid men and women.

u are trained as a "medical professional" and "first responder" they are not. U do a disservice to yourself and all medical people by equating the two as the same. Although I'm sure u have heard how some doctors and nurses do talk about certain patients, more so now in todays society.
most of them before their TSA job were only capable of being a bagger at the checkout line. now they are checking bags in the line.

Thats funny! 

I was only equating about being professional. 

[fudgie]

I dont think i could. I been to a few t/t bars and cant remember all them in my face dances. 

Yeah, but remember. At the airport men check men. Hopefully you didn't go to
the wrong kind of bar!!

Nah I haven't. Been to a lesbien bar for 6 or 8 hrs once.  Also partied a few times with a few gay guys. If Kit wanted to hit a 'male revue' and wanted me to go, I would. She goes with me to the females t/t bars and biker bars with chics with barely nothing on. Its only fair that I would do it for her.

Oh by the way the name fudgie has nothing to do with it! 

[fudgie]

Found this on the Indiana State police web site.

IC 35-47-6-3
Consent to search of person or personal belongings
35-47-6-3 Sec. 3. Any person purchasing a ticket to board any commercial or charter aircraft
shall by such purchase consent to a search of his person or personal belongings by the company
selling said ticket to him. In case said person shall refuse to submit to a search of his person or
personal belongings by said aircraft company, the person refusing may be denied the right to
board said commercial or charter aircraft.

[scoot]

Yawn....... If Y'all enjoyed talking about motorcycles as much as this crap this might turn into.....gasp...a motorcycle forum! 

I couldn't agree with you more. 

[Hoser]

Found this on the Indiana State police web site.

IC 35-47-6-3
Consent to search of person or personal belongings
35-47-6-3 Sec. 3. Any person purchasing a ticket to board any commercial or charter aircraft
shall by such purchase consent to a search of his person or personal belongings by the company
selling said ticket to him. In case said person shall refuse to submit to a search of his person or
personal belongings by said aircraft company, the person refusing may be denied the right to
board said commercial or charter aircraft.

I have no problem not flying as an alternative to a search,  but correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't the guy who refused the scan and the search detained and fined after he tried to leave the airport?  Seems to me after he refused it would be over.  Just cause he verbally gave a few people a hard time is no reason to hold him.  Thin skinned folks don't make good cops, abd apparently the same is true about TSA security folks.  Hoser