The TSA molested me in the Orange County Airport. It was sexual assault. Plain and simple. Just because she had an uniform on, doesn’t make it okay. R.I.P 4th amendment.
Tag Archives: TSA
Top 10 Reasons to Abolish the TSA
Originally posted at FreedomWorks.org.
1. The TSA Violates the Fourth Amendment.
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that “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.”
This means that government officials must have probable cause that a person has committed a crime in order to search them. The TSA routinely violates the Fourth Amendment by subjecting airline passengers to X-Ray scanners and invasive pat downs without probable cause or a warrant. A person boarding an airplane does not justify probable cause.
2. The TSA Invades the Privacy of Airline Passengers.
The TSA allegedly randomly selects airline passengers to go through the X-Ray scanners. These full body scanners create a detailed outline of the passenger’s naked body for a TSA agent to examine in a back room. A lot of travelers are understandably highly uncomfortable with this procedure. Those passengers that opt out of the body scanners will be subjected to an invasive full contact pat down from a government bureaucrat. Many passengers who have experienced the pat downs equate them with sexual assault.
3. The TSA’s X-Ray Scanners May Have Health Risks.
The TSA claims that these X-Ray scanners are perfectly safe but some expert scientists say otherwise. A group of scientists at the University of California, San Francisco wrote a letter to the White House stating that “there is good reason to believe that these scanners will increase the risk of cancer to children and other vulnerable populations.” Pilots and other frequent fliers have expressed concern that the level of radiation may have long term health damages.
4. The TSA Cost Too Much Money.
The TSA’s budget has increased from $4.7 billion in 2002 to $7.8 billion in 2011. Despite the 60 percent increase in funding in less than a decade, the TSA has not improved safety at airports. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay billions of dollars a year for an incompetent bureaucracy.
5. The TSA Harasses and Humiliates Innocent Passengers.
The TSA has a long history of harassing and humiliating innocent airline passengers. For instance, a bladder cancer survivor was left embarrassed and covered with his own urine after the TSA roughly patted his urostomy bag despite warnings at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport. The TSA harasses airline passengers regardless of their age. Back in April 2011, a viral video surfaced of a TSA agent patting down a visibly upset six year old girl. Stories of the TSA fondling innocent young children and women are far too common. In June 2011, a 95 year old cancer-stricken woman was detained by the TSA for 45 minutes and asked to remove her adult diaper before boarding her flight at the Northwest Florida Regional Airport.
6. The TSA is Too Slow.
Many travelers complain about how long it takes to get through airport security when the TSA is in charge. The Pittsburgh International Airport recommends that passengers show up 90 minutes before a domestic flight and 2 hours before an International flight partly because it takes so long to get through security lines. Some travelers miss their scheduled flight because the TSA is taking too long to do their invasive procedures.
7. Abolishing the TSA Would Likely Minimize Wait Times.
Private security companies will likely minimize security waiting lines at the airport. It has been found that private screeners generally work faster than TSA agents. A 2011 House Transportation Committee found that, in the time it takes TSA screeners at the Los Angeles airport to process 100 passengers, private screeners at the San Francisco International Airport process 165 passengers. Private screeners were significantly faster than TSA agents in that particular study.
8. The TSA Doesn’t Make Us Safer.
The TSA is nothing more than Security Theater. It is a government monopoly that has no incentives to improve their screenings. The TSA has not caught a single terrorist since its inception. The now infamous “shoe bomber” and “underwear bomber” were not stopped by the TSA. These terrorists were instead stopped by airline passengers. A leaked TSA report found that security screeners failed to find fake bombs hidden on undercover agents posing as airline passengers in more than 60 percent of tests. TSA screeners at the Los Angeles International Airport missed about 75 percent of stimulated explosives and bomb parts that the undercover testers hid underneath their clothes or in their carry-on luggage.
9. Abolishing the TSA Would Likely Make Us Safer.
The TSA should be abolished and airline companies should be free to provide their own private security. Private airlines companies will then be held directly liable for any security lapses or harassment towards passengers. This means that airline companies have incentives to provide high quality security that treats consumers with respect.
A handful of airports use private screeners instead of TSA agents—the TSA is currently no longer permitting any additional airports to opt out.13 According to the same leaked TSA study cited above, the private screeners at the San Francisco International Airport detected a bomb hidden on the undercover agents 80 percent of the time—a rate much higher than TSA agents.
10. The TSA is Expanding its Reach.
The TSA isn’t just in airports anymore. The agency is increasingly conducting searches and screenings at subways, train stations, ferry docks, and other mass transit locations. It is time to end the TSA before they seize more control over transportation in the United States.
Ron Paul’s Budget Plan is the Real Deal
Originally posted at freedomworks.org.
Ron Paul recently released his bold “Plan to Restore America,” which would cut nearly a whopping $1 trillion in one year and eliminate five federal departments. While many Republicans like to talk about slashing spending, Ron Paul has consistently proved himself to be a rare man in Washington who can walk his talk. As Cato Institute scholar Tad DeHaven says, “my reaction to the proposal can be summed up in one word: hallelujah.” His budget blueprint would set us in the right direction to restore a constitutionally limited government.
The “Plan to Restore America” would deliver a true balanced budget in year three of Dr. Paul’s presidency without raising taxes. He is the only presidential candidate that has revealed a balanced budget plan and it’s much bolder than plans introduced by other sitting congressmen. Unlike President Obama’s so-called spending cuts that just reduce expected spending increases, Ron Paul’s plan would cut real dollar spending.
Many Republicans just want to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic while it’s going down. Ron Paul offers real solutions to balance the budget in the near future instead of several decades down the road. His plan would eliminate the Department of Energy, Housing and Urban Development, Energy, Commerce and Interior. Are any of the other GOP presidential candidates—besides former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson—calling for the elimination of even one department? Tinkering around the edges won’t cut it in the long term.
One of my favorite highlights of the proposal is that it would allow young people to opt out of entitlement programs. Perhaps this is one of the many reasons young people have flocked to Ron Paul’s campaign. Forcing individuals into a mandatory government program against their will is antithetical to freedom. While some GOP candidates have called Social Security a Ponzi scheme, I have yet to hear any other candidate propose allowing individuals to opt out.
Ron Paul reminds fellow Republicans on what it means to be a fiscal conservative. Or as the National Review’s Kevin D. Williamson titles his blog post on the budget plan, “Ron Paul Dropping a Reality Bomb on the GOP Field.” Other highlights of his plan include abolishing the Transportation Security Administration, ending corporate subsidies, eliminating the Death Tax and repealing ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley.
Though a largely symbolic measure, Ron Paul will take a salary of $39,336, which is approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker. This should come as no surprise since Ron Paul never votes to raise congressional pay and returns a portion of unspent office funds to the U.S. treasury every year. And of course, any Ron Paul budget plan includes a full audit of the Federal Reserve and allows for competing currency.
The Washington Post concurs that Paul’s budget plan “goes well beyond what other Republican candidates are proposing.” It is refreshing to see a Republican presidential candidate spell out specifics rather than offering up vague statements on what he wants to cut. With such a great plan to get America back on track, it’s a huge disappointment that Ron Paul has placed dead last in allotted speaking time at the GOP debates. He has only been allotted a total of 18 minutes and 47 seconds in three GOP debates while the less principled Mitt Romney has had 41 minutes and 9 seconds of speaking time.
Ron Paul’s voice of sanity deserves to heard. The other GOP candidates are sounding more and more like Ron Paul these days. They should follow in his footsteps by naming specific departments they would cut if elected.
Texas to TSA: “Come and Take It.”
Originally posted at FreedomWorks.org.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is a prime example of trading liberty for so-called security. The latest viral TSA outrage occurred on June 18 when officers forced a wheelchair bound, 95-year-old leukemia sufferer to remove her adult diaper. The innocent elderly woman was detained by the TSA for a whopping 45 minutes. Her daughter who filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security stated that “it’s something I couldn’t imagine happening on American soil.”
Our Founding Fathers would be ashamed at the overreaching federal government violating our inalienable right to privacy. These stories of TSA abuse are far too common. The Humble Libertarian lists ten of the TSA’s worst actions, which include a 6-year-old girl being groped and a bladder-cancer survivor who was covered in urine after officers roughly patted his urostomy bag.
In an ABC News interview, TSA administrator John Pistole said that “I see flying as a privilege.” The scanners and pat-downs, however, are clearly a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause. Getting on an airplane does not justify probable cause—the reasonable belief that someone has committed a crime. Innocent travelers should never be subjected to virtual strip searches or invasive full contact pat downs from armed government bureaucrats.
A growing number of states are putting their foot down. According to the Tenth Amendment Center, there are at least five states considering bills to ban unconstitutional and immoral TSA practices. In response to pending legislation in the Texas legislature that would outlaw any searches by the TSA without probable cause, the federal government threatened the state with a no fly zone. U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy sent a letter to high-ranking Texas officials statingthat if such a law is enacted, the “TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.”
Texas hasn’t fully backed down. On Monday, the Texas House gave preliminary approval for HB 41 which prohibits TSA invasive pat-downs without probable cause. The penalty would be $4,000 fine and up to one-year in jail. The Texas Senate later passed SB 29, a watered-down version of the anti-groping bill, which allows hand searches if there is reasonable suspicion. The Senate version includes a caveat that says no TSA patdowns “without reasonable suspicion of the presence of an unknown, unlawful, or prohibited object.”
The terms “probable cause” and “reasonable suspicion” are often interchanged. But probable cause is a much stronger term than reasonable suspicion. Probable cause means that there is strong evidence of guilt while reasonable suspicion is generally the lowest level of proof. An officer can claim “reasonable suspicion” with little more than a hunch that you could or have committed a crime.
The Texas legislature should make the right decision by passing the stronger bill outlawing TSA pat-downs without probable cause. It’s a shame that the final bill might be watered-down, but it would still be a step in the right direction. Whether the original or watered-down bill is signed into law, TSA agents would still be potentially charged with a Class A misdemeanor for inappropriately touching airline customers. It’s time that the states tell the federal government to back off. As Texas Rep. David Simpson (R-Longview), the sponsor of the stronger House passed bill said, “come and take it.”
The TSA bullies have stepped up their threats against Texas. An entry on the TSA blog says “what’s our take on the Texas House of Representatives voting to ban the current TSA pat-down? Well, the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution prevents states from regulating the federal government.” This is simply not the case. As Corie Whalen of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas says “no federal statue is being contravened and Texas does have the right to do this.”
The TSA has not stopped one attempted terrorist attack since its implementation after 9/11. We would be better off if we abolished the TSA and allowed airlines to provide their own private security. The private sector has far more incentives to provide better security that protects customers while treating them with respect and dignity.
Stop the TSA’s Assault on Freedom
Originally posted at Young Americans for Liberty.
The backlash over the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) new invasive procedures has transcended left vs. right politics. Under the banner of security, American citizens are being subjected to virtual strip searches or intrusive full contact pat downs from an armed government bureaucrat. These policies do more to humiliate us and pad the pockets of lobbyists than actually keep us safe.
When will we say “enough is enough?” When will we refuse to surrender our fundamental right to privacy and our basic civil liberties? With the holiday season approaching, 96 percent of Americans say that they are less likely to fly due to the new invasive “security” measures. Only 3 percent of those surveyed claim that these are necessary procedures needed to prevent terrorism.
Some notable pilots, airline attendances and passengers have already stood up to these unconstitutional procedures. The head of a flight attendant’s union said that these intimate pat downs—the only alternative to the naked scanner— would “drudge up some bad memories” for anyone who has ever been sexually assaulted.
The U.S Airline Pilots Association (USAPA) and Allied Pilots Association—representing a total of 16,500 pilots— have issued statements advising pilots to avoid the new privacy infringing procedures. According to the USAPA:
Since that time several pilots and flight attendants have encountered problems with TSOs and their implementation of the rules. One US Airways pilot, after being selected for an enhanced pat-down, experienced a frisking that has left him unable to function as a crewmember. The words this pilot used to describe the incident included ‘sexual molestation.
The scanners are clearly a violation of the fourth amendment which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause. How does getting on an airplane justify probable cause? Surely, a three year old boarding an airplane is not a reasonable belief that he or she has committed a crime.
What happens after a TSA agent examines our private parts via computer screen in a back room? Even the U.S Marshals Service recently admitted to saving and storing 35,000 of these inappropriate images for questionable purposes.
While the TSA claims that these scanners are perfectly safe, expert scientists are saying otherwise. A group of scientists at the University of California, San Francisco wrote to the White House about potential health risks saying that “There is good reason to believe that these scanners will increase the risk of cancer to children and other vulnerable populations.” Pilots and other frequent fliers have expressed concern that the level of radiation may have long term health damages.
At most airports with the scanners, people—including small children—are chosen supposedly at random to enter into the full body scanner. TSA plans to eventually replace metal detectors with mandatory naked scanners at every airport. In England, however, these scanners are banned for children under 18 years old since they are a violation of child pornography laws. Why should adults have to submit to a porno scanner before riding on an airplane?
In the Washington Examiner, Tim Carney writes that these full body scanners have a well-connected lobby. So far, major contractors within the Department of Homeland Security that manufacture these scanners have made hundreds of millions of dollars. He notes:
Rapiscan’s [Security Systems] lobbyists include Susan Carr, a former senior legislative aide to Rep. David Price, D-N.C., chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee. When Defense Daily reported on Price’s appropriations bill last winter, the publication noted ‘Price likes the budget for its emphasis on filling gaps in aviation security, in particular the whole body imaging systems.
Moreover, these expensive scanners are likely ineffective at detecting any weapons or explosives that a person might have. Since the naked machines are incapable of seeing through skin, a terrorist could simply hide weapons in body cavities. Tim Carney writes:
Deploying these naked scanners was a reaction to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s failed attempt to blow up a plane on Christmas 2009, but the Government Accountability Office found, “it remains unclear whether [the scanners] would have been able to detect the weapon Mr. Abdulmutallab used.
Since the creation of the TSA in 2001, it has proven to be an ineffective and abusive federal agency. One can only imagine the number of lawsuits that TSA would have against them if they were a private company held accountable to the American public. As Ron Paul writes, “TSA has created an atmosphere of fear and meek subservience in our airports that smacks of Soviet bureaucratic bullying.”
These government bullies do not belong in our airports. Airline companies—many that opposed the TSA since its creation—have more incentives to provide excellent security that protects customers while treating them with respect. For the government to require you to be photographed naked or groped before traveling is humiliating and dehumanizing. Let’s send a message to the Obama administration that we wish to fly with dignity.
