The Obama Approved (Nazi)TSA sexual assault of former Miss USA

[Quantum Windbag]

You have it backwards

The federal law takes precedence in this case. A state does not have the authority to reduce federal security restrictions on any interstate flight. The federal government has the authority to determine the screening any passenger goes through to use our airways

If Texas reduces security, then those flights have no right to leave the state

Again, for the people that miss the forest for the trees.

No federal law gives anyone the right to break a state law.

That means that, if a TSO breaks a law doing exactly what he was told to do by his supervisor he not only can be arrested, he will be convicted. That was actually established during the Nuremberg trials, I was only following orders is not a defense. Like it or not, no court anywhere will rule differently.

You're a god damned fool. There really is no other way to put it. If you are being patted down at an airport, it is because you CONSENTED to being patted down. Therefor the pat down is not ILLEGAL, and no state law could make patting down someone who has consented to a pat down illegal. Now it is true that someone can abuse their position and purposely fondle someone during these pat downs, but the instances of that being done are few and far between; AND when they DO happen that is because the person doing it is a vile piece of trash, it is not because the policy is bad.

Use this as an analogy. You are pro carrying a concealed weapon, I have gathered from reading your posts. Now let's suppose that someone who has every license to carry a concealed weapon pulls that weapon out and kills a room full of bystanders. Do you now say that because someone abused the right to carry a concealed weapon that we should do away with concealed weapon permits? Or do you say that that person was obviously fucked up and would have found another way to act illegally if they hadn't been able to legally carry a concealed weapon?

They pat you down even if you decide to turn around and leave when they describe the pat down. How is that giving consent? They also pat people down in bus stations, train stations, and subways. Did those people also consent? Even if they did consent to the pat down, does that mean they consented to being assaulted? Did the guy in San Diego who told them that if they touch his junk he will have them arrested also consent to a pat down? What makes you think that implied consent even applies to this situation?

Do you have proof that the cases of people abusing their power are few and far between? Should I feel better because the instances of this happening are isolated, or concerned that they seem to be increasing?

How is the policy not bad? It ignores the Constitution, and allows people to arbitrarily change the rules without notice. Attractive women are often singled out for extra screening even if there is not cause, and one of the things that gets you screened is pointing out the problems with the policy. Even objecting to a specific screener that you happen to know is vile piece of trash.

The attempt to compare this to concealed carry is completely off base. Permits are issued to individuals, I object to the TSA as an agency, not just to the occasional things they do wrong. I highlight the things they do wrong to make my point about the need to abolish the TSA, but I would argue that even if they never had a single incident where a TSO did something wrong.

 

[TheBrain]

Again, for the people that miss the forest for the trees.

No federal law gives anyone the right to break a state law.

That means that, if a TSO breaks a law doing exactly what he was told to do by his supervisor he not only can be arrested, he will be convicted. That was actually established during the Nuremberg trials, I was only following orders is not a defense. Like it or not, no court anywhere will rule differently.

You're a god damned fool. There really is no other way to put it. If you are being patted down at an airport, it is because you CONSENTED to being patted down. Therefor the pat down is not ILLEGAL, and no state law could make patting down someone who has consented to a pat down illegal. Now it is true that someone can abuse their position and purposely fondle someone during these pat downs, but the instances of that being done are few and far between; AND when they DO happen that is because the person doing it is a vile piece of trash, it is not because the policy is bad.

Use this as an analogy. You are pro carrying a concealed weapon, I have gathered from reading your posts. Now let's suppose that someone who has every license to carry a concealed weapon pulls that weapon out and kills a room full of bystanders. Do you now say that because someone abused the right to carry a concealed weapon that we should do away with concealed weapon permits? Or do you say that that person was obviously fucked up and would have found another way to act illegally if they hadn't been able to legally carry a concealed weapon?

They pat you down even if you decide to turn around and leave when they describe the pat down. How is that giving consent?

You gave consent to be scrutinized the minute you walked into an airport.

They also pat people down in bus stations, train stations, and subways. Did those people also consent? Even if they did consent to the pat down, does that mean they consented to being assaulted? Did the guy in San Diego who told them that if they touch his junk he will have them arrested also consent to a pat down? What makes you think that implied consent even applies to this situation?

Ditto on the consent, oh and by the way, it is within your rights to call the police or sue if you feel you were sexually abused. To my knowledge no one has ever said differently.

Do you have proof that the cases of people abusing their power are few and far between? Should I feel better because the instances of this happening are isolated, or concerned that they seem to be increasing?

Indeed I do, hundreds of thousands of people fly in this nation each day, and the number of who complain about being "abused" is so small as to be inconsequential.

How is the policy not bad? It ignores the Constitution, and allows people to arbitrarily change the rules without notice.

PLease show me where in the COTUS you are guaranteed not to be patted down before getting on public transportation

Attractive women are often singled out for extra screening even if there is not cause, and one of the things that gets you screened is pointing out the problems with the policy. Even objecting to a specific screener that you happen to know is vile piece of trash.

Any screeners who are singling out single women for no legitimate reason should be fired and thrown in jail, but you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The attempt to compare this to concealed carry is completely off base. Permits are issued to individuals, I object to the TSA as an agency, not just to the occasional things they do wrong. I highlight the things they do wrong to make my point about the need to abolish the TSA, but I would argue that even if they never had a single incident where a TSO did something wrong.

No it's a completely valid analogy. You don't throw out an entire system just because SOME people abuse it.

Yes I see you object to the TSA you prefer a system where no one attempts to screen who gets on airplane with what. As I said earlier, you're a fool.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh shut up. Has nothing to do with R or D. It has to do with the FACT that most of these "victims" are in fact not victims. 99% of people wouldn't even know what is an acceptable pat down and what constitutes an abuse. AND 100% of them could have avoided a pat down by walking through the fucking X Ray machine.

Do you like being wrong?

You cannot always avoid a pat down by going through the X-ray machine because most airports do not have the new machines. All airports do have the pat down rules though.

So you're claim is that every airport that does not have the new X ray machines requires every person to be patted down? That's rather odd because I flew just two weeks ago, and in fact the airport I fly out of has the older X rays and the TSA makes do, no pat downs. I'm sure that is the case in most airports that do not yet have the newer X Ray machines.

That is the TSA claim, not mine.

The TSA Blog: New TSA Pat-down Procedures

By the way, thank you for making my point that the TSA does not follow its own rules.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You gave consent to be scrutinized the minute you walked into an airport.

Wrong. You are not required to go through screening unless you intend to get on a plane. Anyone is free to walk up to the security point and stand around and watch without being screened.

Ditto on the consent, oh and by the way, it is within your rights to call the police or sue if you feel you were sexually abused. To my knowledge no one has ever said differently.

Ditto on being wrong again. As for filing a complaint, I file a complaint every time the TSA talks to me.

Indeed I do, hundreds of thousands of people fly in this nation each day, and the number of who complain about being "abused" is so small as to be inconsequential.

Even fewer get raped every day, yet no one considers that inconsequential.

PLease show me where in the COTUS you are guaranteed not to be patted down before getting on public transportation

Try reading the 4th Amendment again.

Any screeners who are singling out single women for no legitimate reason should be fired and thrown in jail, but you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

You cannot fire the entire TSA workforce without throwing out the baby.

No it's a completely valid analogy. You don't throw out an entire system just because SOME people abuse it.

I'm not, I am throwing it out because the system itself is abusive.

Yes I see you object to the TSA you prefer a system where no one attempts to screen who gets on airplane with what. As I said earlier, you're a fool.

You obviously have not ever read this thread, or you would see what type of system I prefer. I prefer one that actually works, employs people who make smart choices, and trains them for the job they are supposed to be doing. If you think that sounds unreasonable I really do not care.

 

[rightwinger]

I understand now, you insist on proving that you chose the name TheBrian because you are just like the mouse in the old cartoon, and Pinky is actually the smart one.

Even when federal law does not give the state a choice they can still ignore it. This is proven every single day, because federal law makes all possession of marijuana a criminal act, and makes possession with the intent to sell or distribute it a felony. None the less, many states allow people to not only possess marijuana for medical purposes, which federal law does not recognize, they can also sell and distribute it.

Federal law takes precedent if their is a direct conflict. If a state law adds to the federal law there is no conflict, and the state law takes precedence. That is why you cannot argue in court that federal law gives a lighter sentence if you rob a bank than state law does, even though both federal and state law applies.

Regardless, nothing actually changes my original statement, no federal law gives anyone the right to break a state law.

You have it backwards

The federal law takes precedence in this case. A state does not have the authority to reduce federal security restrictions on any interstate flight. The federal government has the authority to determine the screening any passenger goes through to use our airways

If Texas reduces security, then those flights have no right to leave the state

Again, for the people that miss the forest for the trees.

No federal law gives anyone the right to break a state law.

That means that, if a TSO breaks a law doing exactly what he was told to do by his supervisor he not only can be arrested, he will be convicted. That was actually established during the Nuremberg trials, I was only following orders is not a defense. Like it or not, no court anywhere will rule differently.

Using large fonts does not make it so. Per the Constitutions Supremacy Clause ,Federal Govt laws take precedence.

The Federal Govt controls our sky's (FAA). If you don't like the rules, you don't fly. No commercial aircraft with improperly screened passengers is allowed in our airspace

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You have it backwards

The federal law takes precedence in this case. A state does not have the authority to reduce federal security restrictions on any interstate flight. The federal government has the authority to determine the screening any passenger goes through to use our airways

If Texas reduces security, then those flights have no right to leave the state

Again, for the people that miss the forest for the trees.

No federal law gives anyone the right to break a state law.

That means that, if a TSO breaks a law doing exactly what he was told to do by his supervisor he not only can be arrested, he will be convicted. That was actually established during the Nuremberg trials, I was only following orders is not a defense. Like it or not, no court anywhere will rule differently.

Using large fonts does not make it so. Per the Constitutions Supremacy Clause ,Federal Govt laws take precedence.

The Federal Govt controls our sky's (FAA). If you don't like the rules, you don't fly. No commercial aircraft with improperly screened passengers is allowed in our airspace

Are you trying to argue that it a federal employee breaks a law they cannot be charged with a crime in state court?

 

[TheBrain]

Again, for the people that miss the forest for the trees.

No federal law gives anyone the right to break a state law.

That means that, if a TSO breaks a law doing exactly what he was told to do by his supervisor he not only can be arrested, he will be convicted. That was actually established during the Nuremberg trials, I was only following orders is not a defense. Like it or not, no court anywhere will rule differently.

Using large fonts does not make it so. Per the Constitutions Supremacy Clause ,Federal Govt laws take precedence.

The Federal Govt controls our sky's (FAA). If you don't like the rules, you don't fly. No commercial aircraft with improperly screened passengers is allowed in our airspace

Are you trying to argue that it a federal employee breaks a law they cannot be charged with a crime in state court?

Stop being obtuse. You know damn well that TSA agents are culpable if they break the law, just as any LEO would be. That's the entire point. Shut the fuck up , let them do their job , and if they violate your rights, take appropriate action, and let your fellow Americans decide if they exceeded their authority.

But please, just continue to act like TSA agents run wild and do whatever they want, not like you could possibly look any more foolish at this point.

 

[Valerie]

So you agree these alleged airport incidents are certainly not enough to warrant characterizing the USA as a "de fact POLICE STATE" ?

No, not in of themselves, but those combined with lots of other abuses we're seeing around the country certainly could.

Exactly.

I'm glad you're both conceding that TSA screenings do not amount to police state goose stepping...

 

[rightwinger]

Again, for the people that miss the forest for the trees.

No federal law gives anyone the right to break a state law.

That means that, if a TSO breaks a law doing exactly what he was told to do by his supervisor he not only can be arrested, he will be convicted. That was actually established during the Nuremberg trials, I was only following orders is not a defense. Like it or not, no court anywhere will rule differently.

Using large fonts does not make it so. Per the Constitutions Supremacy Clause ,Federal Govt laws take precedence.

The Federal Govt controls our sky's (FAA). If you don't like the rules, you don't fly. No commercial aircraft with improperly screened passengers is allowed in our airspace

Are you trying to argue that it a federal employee breaks a law they cannot be charged with a crime in state court?

NOOOOOoooooo........I'm trying to imply that if a state passes a law that makes TSA agents doing their job a crime, then that law has no validity

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, not in of themselves, but those combined with lots of other abuses we're seeing around the country certainly could.

Exactly.

I'm glad you're both conceding that TSA screenings do not amount to police state goose stepping...

The TSA itself does though.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Using large fonts does not make it so. Per the Constitutions Supremacy Clause ,Federal Govt laws take precedence.

The Federal Govt controls our sky's (FAA). If you don't like the rules, you don't fly. No commercial aircraft with improperly screened passengers is allowed in our airspace

Are you trying to argue that it a federal employee breaks a law they cannot be charged with a crime in state court?

NOOOOOoooooo........I'm trying to imply that if a state passes a law that makes TSA agents doing their job a crime, then that law has no validity

If a TSO reaches inside a childs clothing it is a crime, period.

 

[rightwinger]

Are you trying to argue that it a federal employee breaks a law they cannot be charged with a crime in state court?

NOOOOOoooooo........I'm trying to imply that if a state passes a law that makes TSA agents doing their job a crime, then that law has no validity

If a TSO reaches inside a childs clothing it is a crime, period.

Show where that has happened

 

[TheBrain]

Are you trying to argue that it a federal employee breaks a law they cannot be charged with a crime in state court?

NOOOOOoooooo........I'm trying to imply that if a state passes a law that makes TSA agents doing their job a crime, then that law has no validity

If a TSO reaches inside a childs clothing it is a crime, period.

A) that's not always true
B) Please post an example of a child having a TSA agent reach under their clothes.

 

[Ravi]

No offense to you, QW, but I thought BirferReb was an idiot.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

NOOOOOoooooo........I'm trying to imply that if a state passes a law that makes TSA agents doing their job a crime, then that law has no validity

If a TSO reaches inside a childs clothing it is a crime, period.

Show where that has happened

I bet you thought this would be impossible.

"I am going to reach inside her waist all the way around."

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3sH1GaO_nw]YouTube - 6 Year Old Girl Groped By TSA[/ame]

 

[TheBrain]

If a TSO reaches inside a childs clothing it is a crime, period.

Show where that has happened

I bet you thought this would be impossible.

"I am going to reach inside her waist all the way around."

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3sH1GaO_nw]YouTube - 6 Year Old Girl Groped By TSA[/ame]

You are an idiot, that was about as professional as that woman could have been in doing her job. Seriously, you are one of the most stupid persons I have conversed with.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Show where that has happened

I bet you thought this would be impossible.

"I am going to reach inside her waist all the way around."

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3sH1GaO_nw"]YouTube - 6 Year Old Girl Groped By TSA[/ame]

You are an idiot, that was about as professional as that woman could have been in doing her job. Seriously, you are one of the most stupid persons I have conversed with.

Yep, she followed all the procedures. For you, that is a positive thing. For me, it is an indication of just how far we have sunk because the TSA exists at all.

 

[TheBrain]

I bet you thought this would be impossible.

"I am going to reach inside her waist all the way around."

YouTube - 6 Year Old Girl Groped By TSA

You are an idiot, that was about as professional as that woman could have been in doing her job. Seriously, you are one of the most stupid persons I have conversed with.

Yep, she followed all the procedures. For you, that is a positive thing. For me, it is an indication of just how far we have sunk because the TSA exists at all.

She committed NO crimes. You sir are a moron.

 

[rightwinger]

I bet you thought this would be impossible.

"I am going to reach inside her waist all the way around."

YouTube - 6 Year Old Girl Groped By TSA

You are an idiot, that was about as professional as that woman could have been in doing her job. Seriously, you are one of the most stupid persons I have conversed with.

Yep, she followed all the procedures. For you, that is a positive thing. For me, it is an indication of just how far we have sunk because the TSA exists at all.

LOL...you call that a grope?

Very professional by the TSA worker ..you can see she was well trained in this obvious attempt to create a controversy

 

[Contumacious]

What bothered me most was when she ran the back of her hands down my behind, felt around my breasts, and even came in contact with my vagina! .

Nonsense, SCOTUS has ruled that TSA Agents can touch va-jay-jays in the name of national security and law and order.

Heil Hitler.

.