PDA

View Full Version : Domestic Security: TSA: Constitutional by the Commerce Clause




dskalkowski
01-05-2012, 10:15 PM
I recently got into a conversation with someone over the TSA, and how it has overstepped their boundaries especially in violating the free markets and destroying our principle of liberty. However he has made this argument:

1. We need to protect our liberties with security, if we do not have security our liberties would never exist.
2. The TSA is constitutional and is allowed to regulate commerce, because airspace is federal territory and has the power to regulate interstate commerce.

How can I argue against his points? I've been watching videos, but need specific points to me. Help me out, please and thank you.

AFPVet
01-05-2012, 10:59 PM
Nothing in the Constitution is abused more than the Commerce Clause. The Interstate Commerce Clause was never designed to be used for big government. I would suggest that he study American Constitutional History in order to understand the context in which Interstate Commerce was to be used.

hard@work
01-05-2012, 11:05 PM
The commerce clause does not grant the power of unreasonable search. Using the commerce clause is an excuse to violate the 4th amendment. A right guaranteed and enshrined in the bill of rights. The second amendment grants the power of the airlines to arm themselves. They as private companies can and do have the power of refusal of service based on security concerns. Wasting time, effort, focus, and resources on the TSA is foolish and dangerous. Setting up a Soviet Union era system of search procedures is outright foolish. Especially after decades of US gov propaganda insulting the Soviets and the fascists for having systems like these.

We need real police work. Not a police state apparatus. We also need a foreign policy that does not incite hatred in the first place. Put them together and you have security. Wasting our time and treasure on these ridiculous and ineffective economic drains is making us less safe. It is also making us look more like the Soviets than like a free nation.

And that is just stupid.

Tell your friend to wise up and stop supporting using a sword for surgery. Or more like using an army of Soviet era checkpoints and the acceptance of groping people instead of #(%ing detective work.

jkr
01-05-2012, 11:05 PM
so they dont mind the hand in the crotch?

bolil
01-06-2012, 02:30 AM
I recently got into a conversation with someone over the TSA, and how it has overstepped their boundaries especially in violating the free markets and destroying our principle of liberty. However he has made this argument:

1. We need to protect our liberties with security, if we do not have security our liberties would never exist.
2. The TSA is constitutional and is allowed to regulate commerce, because airspace is federal territory and has the power to regulate interstate commerce.

How can I argue against his points? I've been watching videos, but need specific points to me. Help me out, please and thank you.
1. Circular Reasoning. Our liberties are protected by security because security protects our liberties...?
2. Regulating commerce does not apply to individual, that is civilian, transport. I am flying to Chicago, I am a human not a resource, the TSA being aimed at humans has no express allowance in our constitution. Or something like that.

dskalkowski
01-06-2012, 02:46 PM
Thanks guys, you've helped a lot!

Jandrsn21
01-06-2012, 02:59 PM
'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.'

Have your friend just read the 4th amendment, it isn't that hard to understand.

AFPVet
01-06-2012, 04:31 PM
1. Circular Reasoning. Our liberties are protected by security because security protects our liberties...?
2. Regulating commerce does not apply to individual, that is civilian, transport. I am flying to Chicago, I am a human not a resource, the TSA being aimed at humans has no express allowance in our constitution. Or something like that.

Exactly. The Commerce Clause deals with regulating commerce between the several states and other regions. This does not mean they can form security bureaucracies to supersede state or private security. This simply means that they may provide "regulations" for businesses which extend across state lines. Anything other than regulating "commerce" is not authorized by Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution.