That's cute. You think the US government is still bound by the Bill of Rights.
Despair doesn't look good on anyone, even when dressed up in jaded mockery.
The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
21–30 of 64 posts
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#22This is a note, written by a law student. Not a reason to discount the analysis, per se, but worth keeping in mind if you were thinking of skipping the article and taking the conclusion at face value. The actual analysis starts at 367. The gist of the argument, from a quick read, is that Kyllo (the case that held that the government could not use infrared cameras to look into peoples' homes) established that the gove…
To expand on your summary, first the author provides one on the last 2 pages. Also a significant part of this is that these administrative searches (at airports) must be to prevent terrorism not for "ordinary" crime. FAST would make no distinction (and it's hard for it to make a distinction between any crime and mal-intentions). Further, searches of medical data must meet a higher standard and warrants are required (at least in the case of DUI blood draws, with a few exceptions).
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even Henry VIII had to come up with a plausible legal justification for breaking with the Catholic Church. Being "bound by the Bill of Rights" does not mean that the government must give effect to the broadest interpretations of Constitutional protections. It only means that it must follow clear dictates when they exist, and offer plausible legal constructions when they don't. What we've learned about the NSA program…
> What we've learned about the NSA programs indicates that the government internally tries to toe what well-defined lines exist without crossing them. ?? Is this before or after Clapper lies under oath to congress? is this before or after the Senate Torture report came out along with the revelation that the NSA tampered with evidence. I struggle to understand how you rationally form such a conclusion. We only know th…
We live in a world where the government can drop a nuke on Japan, vaporizing tens of thousands of civilians (including some American POWs), and that's 100% legal. What exactly is "common sense" in such a world, and why does waterboarding or drone strikes run counter to that "common sense"?
The Constitution invests the executive with tremendous power to act in the interest of national security. That was one of the overriding purposes of the document, one written in response to the earlier federal government's failure to put down internal rebellion. That is, like it or not, one of the clearly-defined lines.
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#24FAST seems to be some kind of polygraph-type scanner using cameras. It's very likely that it doesn't work but some military contractor will make millions off of it anyway. Any efficacy data will probably be unavailable or classified. Efficacy doesn't matter to the authorities anyway because having people believe that their minds are being read is almost as good as actually reading their minds.
Are you sure things like this can't work? I work in a computational neuroscience lab and we do a lot of modelling and also machine learning. Things like Eulerian Video magnification (EVM) already prove you can do the rudimentary proof of concepts of such "FAST scans" like being able to extract heart rate and blood flow from a simple video. Techniques like EVM can even be used to detect sound from video files simply based off vibration of the objects captured in video. It seems it wouldn't be too outlandish to assume that EVM techniques + some other more classified technologies + unlimited funding of the NSA/Homeland Security/CIA/TSA could be combined to create something like the tech purported in the link. For the record, I don't work in the actual lab that developed EVM, just in a similar field.
EVM info: http://people.csail.mit.edu/mrub/vidmag/
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#25FAST seems to be some kind of polygraph-type scanner using cameras. It's very likely that it doesn't work but some military contractor will make millions off of it anyway. Any efficacy data will probably be unavailable or classified. Efficacy doesn't matter to the authorities anyway because having people believe that their minds are being read is almost as good as actually reading their minds.
Are you sure things like this can't work? I work in a computational neuroscience lab and we do a lot of modelling and also machine learning. Things like Eulerian Video magnification (EVM) already prove you can do the rudimentary proof of concepts of such "FAST scans" like being able to extract heart rate and blood flow from a simple video. Techniques like EVM can even be used to detect sound from video files simply b…
OK, so lets assume the cameras work. For the same reasons polygraphs have no basis in science, nor would these. I fucking hate the TSA and am fucking furious every time I have to wait to be sexually molested. I'm also worried that they'll fuck up and I'll miss my flight. I'm nervous because I'm worried. I'm constantly looking around to find out how many TSA agents are just fucking around doing nothing.
Yet, I'm not a terrorist. And you know what? most people aren't terrorists. The false positive rate so high it essentially makes the test meaningless and unable to discern an actual threat.
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What we've learned about the NSA programs indicates that the government internally tries to toe what well-defined lines exist without crossing them. ?? Is this before or after Clapper lies under oath to congress? is this before or after the Senate Torture report came out along with the revelation that the NSA tampered with evidence. I struggle to understand how you rationally form such a conclusion. We only know th…
We live in a world where the government can drop a nuke on Japan, vaporizing tens of thousands of civilians (including some American POWs), and that's 100% legal. What exactly is "common sense" in such a world, and why does waterboarding or drone strikes run counter to that "common sense"? The Constitution invests the executive with tremendous power to act in the interest of national security. That was one of the ove…
>We live in a world where the government can drop a nuke on Japan, vaporizing tens of thousands of civilians (including some American POWs), and that's 100% legal.
hahaha, ok maybe you are just insane. How is that legal, are you invoking the Bush doctrine[0] of pre-emptive strikes, although to call that legal is a stretch. Are you suggesting that during a declaration of war it becomes legal? Currently under international law that would not be legal unless agreed upon by the security council.
The Constitution limits the scope and powers of the state and invests the remainder within the body of citizens, it is meant to limit abuse of power by the government. The US government seems little interested in such restraints these days.
Are you going to defend torture as a clear well defined line the government follows, how about one part of government lying to another under oath, is that well defined, how about legal memos that are so secret they cannot be divulged, is that well defined?
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand the idea that gun rights are important because it helps to check oppressive government. Aren't oppressive gun regulations the sort of thing that guns would let you fight against? It's always presented as, "this must be legal, or else we will lose our ability to fight for freedom." If guns don't let you preserve gun rights, how will they let you preserve any other rights?
Also, how would guns help against such a powerful military as the US has?
The US military can't control a country (Iraq) with 4.5% the land area and 11% the population; I find it unlikely the US military would do better in the event of a serious civil war within the US -- and that's assuming no portion of the US army defects against the government.
The only real solution would be to bomb civilian areas under the guise of stopping militia fighters, which, as we've recently seen in history, makes you popular with the locals.
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
We live in a world where the government can drop a nuke on Japan, vaporizing tens of thousands of civilians (including some American POWs), and that's 100% legal. What exactly is "common sense" in such a world, and why does waterboarding or drone strikes run counter to that "common sense"? The Constitution invests the executive with tremendous power to act in the interest of national security. That was one of the ove…
>We live in a world where the government can drop a nuke on Japan, vaporizing tens of thousands of civilians (including some American POWs), and that's 100% legal. hahaha, ok maybe you are just insane. How is that legal, are you invoking the Bush doctrine[0] of pre-emptive strikes, although to call that legal is a stretch. Are you suggesting that during a declaration of war it becomes legal? Currently under internati…
The Constitution is a domestic instrument. It does not limit what the United States can do abroad, and the founders were clear that it wasn't meant to do any such thing. Indeed, the concern during the drafting was not about how to limit the government's powers abroad, but how to ensure that it could still act as a sovereign entity abroad despite being limited domestically.
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you sure things like this can't work? I work in a computational neuroscience lab and we do a lot of modelling and also machine learning. Things like Eulerian Video magnification (EVM) already prove you can do the rudimentary proof of concepts of such "FAST scans" like being able to extract heart rate and blood flow from a simple video. Techniques like EVM can even be used to detect sound from video files simply b…
OK, so lets assume the cameras work. For the same reasons polygraphs have no basis in science, nor would these. I fucking hate the TSA and am fucking furious every time I have to wait to be sexually molested. I'm also worried that they'll fuck up and I'll miss my flight. I'm nervous because I'm worried. I'm constantly looking around to find out how many TSA agents are just fucking around doing nothing. Yet, I'm not a…
The rather strong verbal comments aside - I think this is almost certainly correct.
Polygraph tests are notoriously inaccurate - where as for something like terrorist threats the number of real positives you are interested is probably in the x > 1/10^6.
That's totally fantastic - consider that pregnancy tests have a false positive rate in the single digits.
Re: The TSA's FAST Personality Screening Program Violates the Fourth Amendment [pdf]
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only when convenient. Which is why I find myself reluctantly siding with the vehement nature of gun rights advocates in spite of really desiring a world where guns would not be necessary to possibly keep the "government" (which is increasingly fewer and fewer people with more and more oppressive laws) at bay. On a side note, I find it ironic that those who would most need guns to both protect themselves from the kind…
I don't understand the idea that gun rights are important because it helps to check oppressive government. Aren't oppressive gun regulations the sort of thing that guns would let you fight against? It's always presented as, "this must be legal, or else we will lose our ability to fight for freedom." If guns don't let you preserve gun rights, how will they let you preserve any other rights?
the idea is simple, you give up one your likely to give up on others. One area that people vastly under estimate government and people in politics is their ability to sway people. Both spends tens of millions if not more of dollars in studying people; marketing studies.
They simply start representing the class they need to strip rights or property from in increasingly negative terms, using indirect comparisons and eventually direct. For the children, you like children don't you? Down to "denier" or Nazi. We are here to protect you from people who think wrong, you don't think wrong do you?
The easiest thing is to convince people using fear and jealousy. Politicians are adept at playing groups off each other thereby being able to look like they are the savior above the fray.
So yeah, gun rights are important because they are a right the people were given on day one. What people tend to forget is that government is granted rights by the people and not the other way around