Alternative to TSA pat-downs: More background checks

[nate895]

Some of you guys who were suggesting that this TSA screening garbage might just be for more intrusive security measures going into your personal life were right. According to this Politico article, the alternative to being irradiated and photographed nude or groped is to have an extensive background checks followed by interrogation for select passengers. So much for a right to travel.


If Americans don’t want the government touching their “junk” to improve air security, the alternative may well be greater scrutiny of passengers’ travel histories and personal backgrounds, security experts say.

The public backlash against the aggressive pat-downs the federal government rolled out this month could put more pressure on the government to introduce security measures previously rejected on privacy grounds, including in-depth interrogations of travelers at airports, government scrutiny of passengers’ airline information, and even creation of a secure, standardized national ID card.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45559.html#ixzz16Ddfaofu

I want to file a lawsuit. I am seriously considering actually filing a lawsuit.

[sailingaway]

Government shouldn't do it. Government has abysmal 'privacy policies' thinking it has the right to decide who gets to see and use your information, rather than you having that right. Government is involved in too many areas. If United Airlines wanted info and I wanted to sign up for their frequent flyer mile program which lets me through an abreviated procedure, fine, and I can decide. If they violate privacy I can sue. Not ok if the government does it.

No national ID card. Again, nothing the government bureaucracy does is 'secure', too many people have access. Nor do they have a confidence inspiring record. I can choose an airline that does. Southwest actually comes to mind.

[jmdrake]

Of course. Fake conservatives have been pushing the "profile" meme hard and fast. But we didn't need that at all. The bombers father told our government ahead of time "My son is a terrorist". That was all of the probable cause needed to investigate, detain and arrest him under the pre 9/11 rules. It's called constitutional bounded police work. It's what could have prevented 9/11 (by getting a warrant to search Zacharias Moussoui's laptop.) We've got to work to reframe the debate.

[nate895]

Of course. Fake conservatives have been pushing the "profile" meme hard and fast. But we didn't need that at all. The bombers father told our government ahead of time "My son is a terrorist". That was all of the probable cause needed to investigate, detain and arrest him under the pre 9/11 rules. It's called constitutional bounded police work. It's what could have prevented 9/11 (by getting a warrant to search Zacharias Moussoui's laptop.) We've got to work to reframe the debate.

Seriously. If the state has probable cause to investigate a person for conspiracy to commit mass murder, then, by all means, go and see a judge to grant a warrant to further investigate the person. However, there isn't probable cause to detain every 200th person who goes through airport security and subject them to an hour's worth of interrogation. That's just ridiculous.

[tangent4ronpaul]

You KNOW those that are flagged will almost all be activists. I always get "randomly selected" for special harassment every time I fly (REALLY, REALLY rarely these days for obvious reasons!) I also chatted with a congressional staffer some years ago who was going through the same who said she also also got "randomly selected" for said treatment. :mad:

-t