LONE EAGLE OBSERVER HAS MOVED (AGAIN!)!

YES, THIS MAKES THE THIRD MOVE IN A MONTH
BUT THIS WILL BE THE LAST MOVE!
LONE EAGLE OBSERVER NOW HAS
ITS OWN DOMAIN AND WEB HOSTING SERVICE!
COME JOIN US TODAY!


HTTP://WWW.CHARLESAHALL.US

DONATE TODAY TO LONE EAGLE OBSERVER!

Charles A. Hall: "We are asking for donations totaling $100.00 USD to help buy a domain name and web hosting service for Lone Eagle Observer. Please donate today to LEO and help us advance to the next step!" (Read More Here).

Progress: $0.00 of $100.00

I proudly support TserverHQ.com

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

TSA and the Constitution

Today (Wednesday, 24 November 2010) will be a busy day at airports across the United States.  Millions of people are expected to be traveling across the country and internationally for the Thanksgiving Weekend.  Well, we've all have probably heard from someone, saw it on the news, or read it online about these new Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) policies about these full-body scanners that produce basically a virtual naked image of a person.  If you don't go through these new scanners you are subject to an "enhanced" pat-down that include the feeling of your "private" areas for both men and women.

Now our leaders and their, not ours, appointed personnel are saying we, the citizens, need to use common sense and just basically do as we're told (for the most part).  Some are saying we need to find a "balance" on safety and privacy.
I'm looking at this debate and I'm saying to myself, "Okay, the full body scanner I think I could handle.  It is a virtual image, not me standing in for a porno shoot, and as long as they don't look at my 'private' parts, I'm probably okay."  Now to the "enhanced" pat-down that includes touching of the "private" parts.

The Constitution of the United States states, "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."

Now several things stand out here:

  1. "the right of the people" - This is a defined right.
  2. "secure in their persons... and effects" - That is meaning me and my belongs.
  3. "unreasonable searches and seizures" - I don't think saying no to possible Fifth Amendment violation is unreasonable, do you?
  4. "shall not be violated" - meaning you don't cross over this line!!!  PERIOD!
  5. "but upon probable cause" - You have to have probable cause that I'm about to commit a crime.  A little *beep* and light from a machine doesn't say I'm about to commit a crime, it says I might have forgotten a quarter in my pocket!
Probable cause has been best defined as, "a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime".  I believe that feeling up a person is a violation of this right.  What they have described in these articles for these "enhanced" pat-downs is basically what I was taught over a year ago when I took the Bail Enforcement Academy course to become a Bail Recovery Apprentice!  Bail Recovery Apprentice is another title for Bounty Hunter.  These are things that I was taught when I arrest someone that has jumped bail and how to search them!  On possible criminals!  Not some lady that had breast cancer and has an artificial breast!  You don't ask that person to remove that because you don't have probable cause to execute that search!

Where do you draw the line?  Well, I believe the line has already been drawn and that line is clearly stated in the Constitution of the United States under the Fourth Amendment.

The common sense needs to not be by the people, but our elected representatives and their appointed/hired personnel.  Can we use drug and bomb sniffing dogs?  A bomb sniffing dog has great smell, why not have them sit next to the scanner and sniff the air and if something goes off then you may have probable cause because this animal is trained in detecting that chemical.

I believe that this has been a big mess that TSA could have avoided if they just read the Constitution every now and then because I believe these "enhanced" pat-downs are a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment because they do not have probable cause to treat a traveler like a terrorist.

What I'm upset about also is that it is people coming from outside the United States, traveling into the States trying to do these terrorist acts, not actual individuals inside the United States since September 11th.  Why are the American people being punished and inconvenienced because of these people not even in our country?  Answer me that.

No comments:

Post a Comment