Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Problems with the TSA

saizai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 218 posts

Re: Problems with the TSA

#91

Post by javert »

anigbrowl wrote: post #41
javert wrote: post #4

My mother can't travel by plane, because she has aphasia (can't speak) and a leg brace, due to her stroke. If I go through the airport with her, there is no guarantee the agents will let me stay with her and explain the situation. She can't remove the leg brace on her own for them to make sure it's not a weapon, and TSA agents can't do it properly. So, basically, taking her to the airport is a recipe for having her v…

The TSA is a direct, overt violation of the 4th amendment (search and seizure). Thus, the US federal government is not legitimate under the US Constitution. Don't be so fucking stupid. Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right, and that you don't need to fly (however impractical this is), even if you were right on the 4th amendment argument it doesn't mean 'the US federal government i…

Calling someone you disagree with "fucking stupid" strongly suggests an argument based on empty emotion, not reasoning.

"Privilege" is a false concept in any political discussion. Privileges are granted by the owner of the privilege. But the government does not own my life, nor any aspect thereof, nor any aspect of anybody else's life, including their property. We are not owned by the government. To hold otherwise is fundamentally anti-freedom and pro-authoritarian.

So to reduce that to this particular case: The government does not own airlines, airplanes, airspace, or myself. And even though it does own airports, _we_ (the people) paid for that. So, flying is not a privilege.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#92

Post by anigbrowl »

bigiain wrote: post #85
anigbrowl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The TSA is a direct, overt violation of the 4th amendment (search and seizure). Thus, the US federal government is not legitimate under the US Constitution. Don't be so fucking stupid. Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right, and that you don't need to fly (however impractical this is), even if you were right on the 4th amendment argument it doesn't mean 'the US federal government i…

"Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right" Really? Why is that true? Who gets to decide what's a "right" and what's a "privilege"? On what basis is that determined? What's the means by which the public can challenge those decisions? Without appropriate answers to those questions, in what way is a society operation under those rules not a totalitarian state?

Well, there's this thing called the Supreme Court, which has established various lower courts, and if you don't like the way things are you find a sympathetic lawyer and file a lawsuit in which you make your argument about how things ought to be different.

I don't like to be condescending, but come on, this stuff is in the constitution too. I feel like sometimes people just read the bill or rights and completely ignore the rest of the thing.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#93

Post by anigbrowl »

coin wrote: post #86
anigbrowl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The TSA is a direct, overt violation of the 4th amendment (search and seizure). Thus, the US federal government is not legitimate under the US Constitution. Don't be so fucking stupid. Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right, and that you don't need to fly (however impractical this is), even if you were right on the 4th amendment argument it doesn't mean 'the US federal government i…

Here we go again, another "flying is a privilege" argument. Flying is a right: " A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace." From http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/40103 I choose to exercise that right by hiring air travel with an airline. Airspace is a public resource that belongs to everyone.

Keep reading.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#94

Post by [deleted] »

coin wrote: post #86
anigbrowl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The TSA is a direct, overt violation of the 4th amendment (search and seizure). Thus, the US federal government is not legitimate under the US Constitution. Don't be so fucking stupid. Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right, and that you don't need to fly (however impractical this is), even if you were right on the 4th amendment argument it doesn't mean 'the US federal government i…

Here we go again, another "flying is a privilege" argument. Flying is a right: " A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace." From http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/40103 I choose to exercise that right by hiring air travel with an airline. Airspace is a public resource that belongs to everyone.

[deleted]

Re: Problems with the TSA

#95

Post by javert »

bigiain wrote: post #85
anigbrowl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The TSA is a direct, overt violation of the 4th amendment (search and seizure). Thus, the US federal government is not legitimate under the US Constitution. Don't be so fucking stupid. Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right, and that you don't need to fly (however impractical this is), even if you were right on the 4th amendment argument it doesn't mean 'the US federal government i…

"Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right" Really? Why is that true? Who gets to decide what's a "right" and what's a "privilege"? On what basis is that determined? What's the means by which the public can challenge those decisions? Without appropriate answers to those questions, in what way is a society operation under those rules not a totalitarian state?

There are appropriate answers to those questions, which come from the field of philosophy, but are generally unrecognized. Which is precisely why the US _is_ heading in the direction of totalitarianism.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#96

Post by DannyBee »

iandanforth wrote: post #67
DannyBee wrote: post #56

I was with him until I watched the actual video, where he basically comes off like a guy deliberately looking for a fight who gets one. He tries to pull the "i don't have to explain why it's a medically necessary liquid, you fuckers should screen it". All they did was ask why it was medically necessary, which is reasonable, in order to prevent people from abusing the policy. His citation that the special needs memo s…

I'm not sure what video you watched. Here's a guy who, to the extent of his non-lawyer knowledge, stands up for his rights in the face of bureaucratic harassment. He doesn't yell, scream, or cry, he just insists on people following their own rules, not having his possessions taken, and being treated like a citizen whose rights should be respected. The above comment implies that it is reasonable for TSA contractors to…

But he's not actually citing their actual rules, he's citing his interpretation of the rules, and claiming various court decisions support him. He's wrong on both points, AFAICT. Now, he may not like that their is more wiggle room than he likes, but ...

As for what is reasonable to inquire about, they can ask about a lot. This is particularly true since it's probably not a custodial interrogation, and they are clearly not asking about evidence of crimes.

You can cite "the way the world should be" all you like. I actually agree it would be a great place to live. But expecting the judicial system to transform it into that world is a dream.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#97

Post by pekk »

coin wrote: post #86
anigbrowl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The TSA is a direct, overt violation of the 4th amendment (search and seizure). Thus, the US federal government is not legitimate under the US Constitution. Don't be so fucking stupid. Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right, and that you don't need to fly (however impractical this is), even if you were right on the 4th amendment argument it doesn't mean 'the US federal government i…

Here we go again, another "flying is a privilege" argument. Flying is a right: " A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace." From http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/40103 I choose to exercise that right by hiring air travel with an airline. Airspace is a public resource that belongs to everyone.

That settles it, then: "the US federal government is not legitimate under the US Constitution."

Re: Problems with the TSA

#98

Post by hnolable »

DannyBee wrote: post #96
iandanforth wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what video you watched. Here's a guy who, to the extent of his non-lawyer knowledge, stands up for his rights in the face of bureaucratic harassment. He doesn't yell, scream, or cry, he just insists on people following their own rules, not having his possessions taken, and being treated like a citizen whose rights should be respected. The above comment implies that it is reasonable for TSA contractors to…

But he's not actually citing their actual rules, he's citing his interpretation of the rules, and claiming various court decisions support him. He's wrong on both points, AFAICT. Now, he may not like that their is more wiggle room than he likes, but ... As for what is reasonable to inquire about, they can ask about a lot. This is particularly true since it's probably not a custodial interrogation, and they are clearl…

Explaining how he's wrong on both points would be very useful.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#99

Post by dthunt »

mgkimsal wrote: post #32
holograham wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

specifically the tone of the overall post and the lack of fact citing for his policy recommendations. Why the 1 quart rule? Why not 2 quarts? 3 quarts? ... I am in 100% agreement that the TSA's policies are mostly erroneous and devoid of logic but my recommendation is combat them with objective facts and logic with a touch of social awareness.

The 1 quart may have been specifically tailored to his own requirements, but I can imagine that many people, for most flights, would be fine with medical liquid amounts of 1q or smaller. Trying to bring a gallon or two of something on a plane just may not be practical, regardless of the medical necessity, and other transport might be required. But... the 3oz rule has struck me as stupid from day one.

His suggestion was for testing containers, if there is a legitimate security concern.

This takes less time than arguing over a 2 liter of aloe juice and ends any inquiry there without violating privacy.

That having been said, I don't think it's the best solution, but it seems to be a minor improvement in most cases, and a very big one in a few others.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#100

Post by pekk »

mgkimsal wrote: post #32
holograham wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

specifically the tone of the overall post and the lack of fact citing for his policy recommendations. Why the 1 quart rule? Why not 2 quarts? 3 quarts? ... I am in 100% agreement that the TSA's policies are mostly erroneous and devoid of logic but my recommendation is combat them with objective facts and logic with a touch of social awareness.

The 1 quart may have been specifically tailored to his own requirements, but I can imagine that many people, for most flights, would be fine with medical liquid amounts of 1q or smaller. Trying to bring a gallon or two of something on a plane just may not be practical, regardless of the medical necessity, and other transport might be required. But... the 3oz rule has struck me as stupid from day one.

Can you provide any more specific justification for the specific measure of liquid to allow, or is it just going to be what you can imagine seems reasonable to you?
Post reply on HN