6 Year Old Girl Groped By TSA

[BigAlOfMD]

6 Year Old Girl Groped By TSA	powered by Aeva

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tsa_child_frisked

[BigAlOfMD]

6 Year Old Girl On Terror Watch List	powered by Aeva

[ricoman]

Do I think the guy was doing his job, as instructed?  Yes
Do I think the procedure needs to be changed when the randon pat down falls to a child? Yes.
Do I think there was inapproprite behavior on the part of the TSA employee? No.
Do I think that TSA employees get there jollies from doing pat downs on anyone? No
Let's don't start the rants again on this topic.

[Chiefy]

Stuff happens.  It's not the place of the TSA agent to ignore a warning about a traveler on his computer.


Would anyone *REALLY* be surprised if you read that a mid east extremest strapped a bomb to his 6 yr old and had her detonate it?  Shocked, horrified sure.  But the terrorists are capable of ANYTHING

[Oss]

looked very professionally done with respect for the family and the young girl

it is what it is these days

[Ice]

looked very professionally done with respect for the family and the young girl

it is what it is these days

I agree with Oss, they did what they had to do, and did it in a very professional manner explaining it all to the mother as the did it and made sure she was able to observe all that the TSA agent did.
As another said "it is what it is" because, if you recall, not all too long ago, our extremist "friends" tried to get an explosive liquid on a plane using baby bottles....

[X Ring]

I STILL believe and NO ONE will convince me otherwise that TSA "patdowns," frisks" or whatever you want to call them are a violation of the 4th Amendment.  As a Law Enforcement Officer, I could never search someone for performing a legal activity with very few exceptions such as being able to explain why I believed someone was carrying a concealed weapon because they were wearing a down coat in the middle of July in South Mississippi.  There needs to be legal action to determine the Constitutionality and Reasonableness of these searches by a U.S. Government Agency. 

Marty

[Bobbo]

Do I think the guy was doing his job, as instructed?  Yes
Do I think the procedure needs to be changed when the randon pat down falls to a child? Yes.
Do I think there was inapproprite behavior on the part of the TSA employee? No.
Do I think that TSA employees get there jollies from doing pat downs on anyone? No
Let's don't start the rants again on this topic.

+1   

[Bobbo]

I STILL believe and NO ONE will convince me otherwise that TSA "patdowns," frisks" or whatever you want to call them are a violation of the 4th Amendment.  As a Law Enforcement Officer, I could never search someone for performing a legal activity with very few exceptions such as being able to explain why I believed someone was carrying a concealed weapon because they were wearing a down coat in the middle of July in South Mississippi.  There needs to be legal action to determine the Constitutionality and Reasonableness of these searches by a U.S. Government Agency. 

Marty

When you travel by air, you essentially give consent to these patdowns, so they are not an unwelcomed (legally) search.  This is comparable to a drug test or other screening used by a company to qualify you for employment.  You are wanting to use a service, and have to agree to regulations and procedures for that service.

[G-Man]

I STILL believe and NO ONE will convince me otherwise that TSA "patdowns," frisks" or whatever you want to call them are a violation of the 4th Amendment.  As a Law Enforcement Officer, I could never search someone for performing a legal activity with very few exceptions such as being able to explain why I believed someone was carrying a concealed weapon because they were wearing a down coat in the middle of July in South Mississippi.  There needs to be legal action to determine the Constitutionality and Reasonableness of these searches by a U.S. Government Agency. 

Marty

When you travel by air, you essentially give consent to these patdowns, so they are not an unwelcomed (legally) search.  This is comparable to a drug test or other screening used by a company to qualify you for employment.  You are wanting to use a service, and have to agree to regulations and procedures for that service.

What about when you show up at a concert and they are patting everyone down.....and it doesn't say this on the ticket and nothing was mentioned when you purchased the ticket.  .....and they tell you that you can't come in and watch the show unless you give in to the patdown? 

It's sad that we are willing to give up our freedoms in the hopes of finding security.  But we're only chasing our tails.   ???    

[fiddle mike]

Face it, the terrorists won.

[designer]

Do I think the guy was doing his job, as instructed?  Yes
Do I think the procedure needs to be changed when the randon pat down falls to a child? Yes.
Do I think there was inapproprite behavior on the part of the TSA employee? No.
Do I think that TSA employees get there jollies from doing pat downs on anyone? No
Let's don't start the rants again on this topic.

+1 

[fiddle mike]

I STILL believe and NO ONE will convince me otherwise that TSA "patdowns," frisks" or whatever you want to call them are a violation of the 4th Amendment.  As a Law Enforcement Officer, I could never search someone for performing a legal activity with very few exceptions such as being able to explain why I believed someone was carrying a concealed weapon because they were wearing a down coat in the middle of July in South Mississippi.  There needs to be legal action to determine the Constitutionality and Reasonableness of these searches by a U.S. Government Agency. 

Marty

You're the exception  then.  Cops follow their pensions and worry about the legality of actions, later."If it's code, enforce it" was posted on this very board.

[Gryphon Rider]

As I've said before, I won't have my children flying into/out of a US airport until policy changes.  When they're 18 they can make their own decision about this.  If policy makers want a net saving of lives, I'd rather have them make it so that you have to be a far better driver to get or renew a driver's licence.

[Bobbo]

I STILL believe and NO ONE will convince me otherwise that TSA "patdowns," frisks" or whatever you want to call them are a violation of the 4th Amendment.  As a Law Enforcement Officer, I could never search someone for performing a legal activity with very few exceptions such as being able to explain why I believed someone was carrying a concealed weapon because they were wearing a down coat in the middle of July in South Mississippi.  There needs to be legal action to determine the Constitutionality and Reasonableness of these searches by a U.S. Government Agency. 

Marty

When you travel by air, you essentially give consent to these patdowns, so they are not an unwelcomed (legally) search.  This is comparable to a drug test or other screening used by a company to qualify you for employment.  You are wanting to use a service, and have to agree to regulations and procedures for that service.

What about when you show up at a concert and they are patting everyone down.....and it doesn't say this on the ticket and nothing was mentioned when you purchased the ticket.  .....and they tell you that you can't come in and watch the show unless you give in to the patdown? 

It's sad that we are willing to give up our freedoms in the hopes of finding security.  But we're only chasing our tails.   ???    

I agree that it can get ridiculous, but your best course of action in this situation would be to call the venue ahead of time to see what procedures are used to enter their property.

[Jess from VA]

What about when you show up at a concert and they are patting everyone down.....and it doesn't say this on the ticket and nothing was mentioned when you purchased the ticket.  .....and they tell you that you can't come in and watch the show unless you give in to the pat down?  

Legal advice:  You might win in court a year later, but you will not see the concert.  

In another life some 30 years ago, I smuggled two magnums of champagne into a concert.  Loops tied to each neck, run over each shoulder with an open fat goose down coat (in Winter).  There were cursory searches, we knew about.  As I opened the coat, my elbows squeezed the bottles out of sight behind my back .  I was waived thru, but as I walked away, they clinked together..... whoops.   I turned around and the guy said "did you hear that?"   "Yeah, I did, who was that?"   "I dunno, but if I catch him, he's out of here."   Later when the lights went down, I shot the corks over Chicago from the 6th row.   There was other stuff being passed up and down the rows as well.  Oh to be young and dumb...........  

[G-Man]

I STILL believe and NO ONE will convince me otherwise that TSA "patdowns," frisks" or whatever you want to call them are a violation of the 4th Amendment.  As a Law Enforcement Officer, I could never search someone for performing a legal activity with very few exceptions such as being able to explain why I believed someone was carrying a concealed weapon because they were wearing a down coat in the middle of July in South Mississippi.  There needs to be legal action to determine the Constitutionality and Reasonableness of these searches by a U.S. Government Agency. 

Marty

When you travel by air, you essentially give consent to these patdowns, so they are not an unwelcomed (legally) search.  This is comparable to a drug test or other screening used by a company to qualify you for employment.  You are wanting to use a service, and have to agree to regulations and procedures for that service.

What about when you show up at a concert and they are patting everyone down.....and it doesn't say this on the ticket and nothing was mentioned when you purchased the ticket.  .....and they tell you that you can't come in and watch the show unless you give in to the patdown? 

It's sad that we are willing to give up our freedoms in the hopes of finding security.  But we're only chasing our tails.   ???    

I agree that it can get ridiculous, but your best course of action in this situation would be to call the venue ahead of time to see what procedures are used to enter their property.

It's different depending upon the artist or act.    Got search for Metallica but not for monster trucks.  Got searched for wrestling, but not for James Taylor.  Then....there are some acts where you can bring in a bottle of water and some you can't. 

TSA = Totally Sans Accountability........."it's my job, I don't have to think" 

[musclehead]

I STILL believe and NO ONE will convince me otherwise that TSA "patdowns," frisks" or whatever you want to call them are a violation of the 4th Amendment.  As a Law Enforcement Officer, I could never search someone for performing a legal activity with very few exceptions such as being able to explain why I believed someone was carrying a concealed weapon because they were wearing a down coat in the middle of July in South Mississippi.  There needs to be legal action to determine the Constitutionality and Reasonableness of these searches by a U.S. Government Agency. 

Marty

When you travel by air, you essentially give consent to these patdowns, so they are not an unwelcomed (legally) search.  This is comparable to a drug test or other screening used by a company to qualify you for employment.  You are wanting to use a service, and have to agree to regulations and procedures for that service.

you may be give consent, I quess it's whatever we're willing to put up with.  I still believe it's 'security theater' and the next attack will have nothing to do with commercial airliners.

[Sludge]

The employee did their job.  That said, IMHO, this whole thing is a knee jerk over reaction to the threat of terrorism.  We have spent truck loads... hell,... TRAIN loads, Boat loads of money on this and we have scanned, patted down, and restricted ourselves for what is probably a statistically insignificant risk at a national level compared to other threats to our lives we face on a daily basis.

The media hypes our fears, the government extends its power, further restricts our freedom, and spends us into a financial black hole.

Bobbo, you brought up drug testing...

When you travel by air, you essentially give consent to these patdowns, so they are not an unwelcomed (legally) search.  This is comparable to a drug test or other screening used by a company to qualify you for employment.  You are wanting to use a service, and have to agree to regulations and procedures for that service.

Odd that we will go to this extreme for terrorism yet not expect folks who receive government assistance, in these times of financial crisis and deficit spending, to submit to drug testing for their various kinds of entitlements and government services.

Sry for the last minute change of subject there but when I read Bobbo's response that was my initial reaction.

[RoadKill]

And what the He// is all this business about having to take a test to drive a car crap? The next thing you  know we will have to show ID to buy a damn beer!    I dont understand why I have to lock my gun in the car just to visit someone in the local Jail either! I pay taxes damnit!

[ArmyValker]

Anybody seen a bomb strapped to a 8 year old?

I have.

[G-Man]

Anybody seen a bomb strapped to a 8 year old?

I have.

Well, that's a debate ender right there.  Can't argue with that one.

And because there have been 8-year-olds strapped with bombs, all of our 8-year-olds have to be subjected to this awfulness.  And because one idiot put a device in his shoe, all of us have to remove our shoes.  And because 16 Saudis and 3 others from Arab nations flew planes into buildings, all of our lives have been changed for the worse.

[Bobbo]

Bobbo, you brought up drug testing...

When you travel by air, you essentially give consent to these patdowns, so they are not an unwelcomed (legally) search.  This is comparable to a drug test or other screening used by a company to qualify you for employment.  You are wanting to use a service, and have to agree to regulations and procedures for that service.

Odd that we will go to this extreme for terrorism yet not expect folks who receive government assistance, in these times of financial crisis and deficit spending, to submit to drug testing for their various kinds of entitlements and government services.

I'm not a fan of doling out money to people who can work.  If we added another layer to the bureaucracy of welfare, such as drug testing, it would only add to the expense of this program, and create a new market for cheating the system.  I doubt if many would be excluded under this rule, since it would be difficult to implement, especially by agents who don't want the extra hassle.  I don't think there is a quick fix for this mess, and would like to see the whole program reduced over time.

[MP]

Bobbo, you brought up drug testing...

When you travel by air, you essentially give consent to these patdowns, so they are not an unwelcomed (legally) search.  This is comparable to a drug test or other screening used by a company to qualify you for employment.  You are wanting to use a service, and have to agree to regulations and procedures for that service.

Odd that we will go to this extreme for terrorism yet not expect folks who receive government assistance, in these times of financial crisis and deficit spending, to submit to drug testing for their various kinds of entitlements and government services.

I'm not a fan of doling out money to people who can work.  If we added another layer to the bureaucracy of welfare, such as drug testing, it would only add to the expense of this program, and create a new market for cheating the system.  I doubt if many would be excluded under this rule, since it would be difficult to implement, especially by agents who don't want the extra hassle.  I don't think there is a quick fix for this mess, and would like to see the whole program reduced over time.

The "fix" is:  If you are capable of working, you do NOT get paid by us.  Period.  Starve, get out on the street, whatever.  As I age, I grow less tolerant of those who game the system, and make those who work support those who are capable, but just do not want to work.

Being hungry is a great incentive to work.

MP

[Jess from VA]

I'm with you MP.... I had very caring parents, but early on my dad made it clear "there will come a time when you will work or starve/die... enjoy your youth son, but prepare for life and work."  My biggest allowance ever was .50 a week (and I had to earn that)... when I went to work at 15 that stopped. 

And I want drug testing too.  Bust once, you're gone for good (one strike).

I was closely involved with 'operation golden flow' in the Air Force... it had some bumps early on but was tuned to perfection.  Random, not universal, but you never knew if your number would come up.  It is a very strong deterrent.  Positive for pot for first term enlisted got an Art 15, followed by admin discharge (fired).  Positive for pot for senior enlisted or officer, or any other drug for anyone got a court martial and jail, and usually a punitive discharge.   (steroids were a lesser offense, but you still got in trouble).  No prosecution for welfare recipients, just kicked off the rolls. I believe such a system would largely pay for itself in the first few years.  And these would be federal dollars well spent, unlike funding the UN, most of NASA, NPR/PBS, a giant IRS, socialized medicine, most subsidies, ethanol, arts, studies of how bugs mate, three wars, a giant education department.............

To err is human, to forgive is not SAC policy.  (Sadly, no more SAC)

[Valkahuna]

Isn't it amazing how easy to understand common sense is?

You are right on! +1

Maybe it's because I am another SAC guy (April '67 - July '72)

I'm with you MP.... I had very caring parents, but early on my dad made it clear "there will come a time when you will work or starve/die... enjoy your youth son, but prepare for life and work."  My biggest allowance ever was .50 a week (and I had to earn that)... when I went to work at 15 that stopped. 

And I want drug testing too.  Bust once, you're gone for good (one strike).

I was closely involved with 'operation golden flow' in the Air Force... it had some bumps early on but was tuned to perfection.  Random, not universal, but you never knew if your number would come up.  It is a very strong deterrent.  Positive for pot for first term enlisted got an Art 15, followed by admin discharge (fired).  Positive for pot for senior enlisted or officer, or any other drug for anyone got a court martial and jail, and usually a punitive discharge.   (steroids were a lesser offense, but you still got in trouble).  No prosecution for welfare recipients, just kicked off the rolls. I believe such a system would largely pay for itself in the first few years.  And these would be federal dollars well spent, unlike funding the UN, most of NASA, NPR/PBS, a giant IRS, socialized medicine, most subsidies, ethanol, arts, studies of how bugs mate, three wars, a giant education department.............

To err is human, to forgive is not SAC policy.  (Sadly, no more SAC)