Texas House passes "anti-groping" airport security bill

[Golding]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/28/us-airport-security-texas-idUSTRE75R03N20110628

I'm willing to acknowledge that I was wrong about the Texas House, if it is what it appears. Takes a long time to do the right thing, and unfortunately it was the politicians fed up with being abused themselves that created the push, rather than politicians fed up with the people they represent being abused. But why look down on a good thing?

Edit: nm

[Vessol]

Looks like Texas has some balls after all, pun intended.

[Anti Federalist]

Aha, they watered the thing down as to be meaningless:


The major change in the amended bill, Simpson said, is a requirement that the Transportation Security Administration agent have "reasonable suspicion" before conducting an enhanced pat-down, a less stringent standard than the "probable cause" in the original measure.

The requirement to have probable cause before frisking an individual caused concern among Texas police officers, afraid it would make it more difficult to conduct routine searches of suspects -- and not just in airports.

"We're concerned about the entire jump to probable cause," said Charley Wilkison, the chief lobbyist for the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas, which represents police organizations. "We're concerned about officers not being able to do their jobs."

The revised bill also includes a provision prohibiting the prosecution of a TSA officer if the officer's actions are "pursuant to and consistent with the Constitution." Violation of the law would be a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $4,000 fine.


Reasonable suspicion = not wanting a pornoscan.

And in my copy of the constitution, nowhere do I see the words "reasonable suspicion".

I do see probable cause however.

Of course, that's no longer in the bill.

[Vessol]

Looks like Texas has some balls after all, pun intended.

I rescind my comment. The Texas State government, as it turns out, does not have any balls after they were examined by TSA officials.

[Golding]

Aha, they watered the thing down as to be meaningless:




Reasonable suspicion = not wanting a pornoscan.

And in my copy of the constitution, nowhere do I see the words "reasonable suspicion".

I do see probable cause however.

Of course, that's no longer in the bill.Harumph, so basically they authorized TSA's gropings under the guise of "anti-groping". Figures it's too good to be true.

[Anti Federalist]

Harumph, so basically they authorized TSA's gropings under the guise of "anti-groping". Figures it's too good to be true.

That's what I'm getting from the article.

Maybe there will be more information as people analyze the new bill.

That much is clear, it is not the same bill.

[1836]

Looks like Texas has some balls after all, pun intended.

One thing the legislature has gotten right. There are others that they have not.

I suppose that, on balance, our state is one of the more liberty-friendly places in the country. But there are plenty of neoconservatives and social issue-only folks.

[Dr.3D]

I'm getting so used to government deception techniques, nothing surprises me now.

[anaconda]

I thought the better bill got killed by Rick Perry and resulted in Alex Jones protesting in the state capitol building?

[Vessol]

I thought the better bill got killed by Rick Perry and resulted in Alex Jones protesting in the state capitol building?

Read the post by AF. They gutted it like a turkey and filled it with stuffing.

[Dr.3D]

Read the post by AF. They gutted it like a turkey and filled it with stuffing.

The typical technique to make the governor look good while fooling the people into thinking he is working for them.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7AWw7t5zj0

[affa]

Harumph, so basically they authorized TSA's gropings under the guise of "anti-groping". Figures it's too good to be true.

That's how it works. That's how it always works.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

The requirement to have probable cause before frisking an individual caused concern among Texas police officers, afraid it would make it more difficult to conduct routine searches of suspects -- and not just in airports.

"We're concerned about the entire jump to probable cause," said Charley Wilkison, the chief lobbyist for the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas, which represents police organizations. "We're concerned about officers not being able to do their jobs."


lol. Their jobs = getting in on the drug action.

[Krugerrand]

Aha, they watered the thing down as to be meaningless:




Reasonable suspicion = not wanting a pornoscan.

And in my copy of the constitution, nowhere do I see the words "reasonable suspicion".

I do see probable cause however.

Of course, that's no longer in the bill.

Clearly, this is a huge step back. But, there is still a small step forward. This will end random gropings. Plus, I would hope that when taken to the court room, they should be compelled to spell out what the "reason" was for the suspicion.

I really think people just need to press sexual harassment charges against the TSA and its agents. Everybody inappropriately touched needs to do this. The courts will have to give the people their day in court. The TSA will get horribly bogged down with legal fees. The agents will get pissed off for having sexual harassment charges placed against them. The weight of it all will crash the system.

[payme_rick]

I don't like the change myself, but as a TSA groper you still have to explain what your "reasonable suspicion" was... That's more than we have right now, so I'll take it, but I agree that the change is complete bullshit and honestly the bill could have been a lot tougher to begin with...