Feds threaten to ground Texas airplanes if anti-groping bill becomes law

[Playinghardball]

Source: Raw Story
By Stephen C. Webster

A bill that would criminalize TSA agents who conduct airport patdown searches was scuttled last night after the federal government threatened to ground all flights out of Texas.

The proposed law would have levied misdemeanor charges against security agents who "intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly the anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast of the other person, including touching through clothing, or touching the other person in a manner that would be offensive to a reasonable person."

An earlier version of House Bill 1937 would have made such action a felony.

"If passes, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute," a letter from the Department of Justice explained (PDF). "Unless or until a such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew."

More at: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/05/25/feds-threaten-to-ground-texas-airplanes-if-anti-groping-bill-becomes-law/

[villager]

1. Gotta love all the hope and change going on at the Federal level!

:thumbsup:

[jberryhill]

33. Compare to Candidate Obama's promise to end FAA's exclusive regulation of aircraft operation!

[Fumesucker]

2. So TSA now "ensures the safety of passengers and crew"?

I've read stories of all kinds of weapon like objects getting through the TSA screening.

[WatsonT]

3. If even a single American is able to fly unmolested then the terrorists will have won

[GoneOffShore]

53. Well, the terrorists have won now. And they are the TSA.

[SDuderstadt]

55. Oh, please n/t

[GoneOffShore]

56. The TSA treats everyone as "guilty until groped" -

ie - the the terrorists have wone and they are the TSA.

[SDuderstadt]

57. It's a security checkpoint...

dude.

You might want to brush up on the law.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GoneOffShore]

80. It's "Security Kabuki" sunshine.

Reinforced cockpit doors, passenger and crew awareness of hijacking attempts and the basic odds put the lie to defenders of the TSA and their boosters.

The "Rapiscan", supplied by Michael Chertoff has been shown not to be effective in the detection of firearms and explosives.

The TSA and the DHS are ever expanding agencies with bad cases of mission creep. Unless they're reined in they're going to be showing up at railway stations, subway stations, bus stops and shopping malls. All under the umbrella phrase:

An abundance of caution.

Actually, they already show up at those locations. Pretty soon we'll need to be searched to walk down the street for a quart of milk or drive to New Jersey.

Welcome to the United States of fear.

[jberryhill]

72. Where were you when the metal detectors were installed in the late 60's?

Having to pass through a metal detector is also a search within the meaning of the 4th Amendment.

[GoneOffShore]

82. I understand that. The Nude o scope and the grope go too far.

[Lucian]

83. What a stupid post.

Really, really fucking stupid post.

[WatsonT]

87. Glad I could piss off the pro-groping crowd

really I would be upset if yall agreed with me.

[SDuderstadt]

4. Could you explain precisely how...

the DOJ "threatened" anyone? That's pretty mild language for a "threat".

[Sinistrous]

12. The cutely legalistic phrase:

"TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights..." is, in common parlance, a threat to retaliate against this attempt to protect the dignity of the public.

Yours is one of the weaker attempts at diversion I've seen. I'm sure you will keep trying.

[SDuderstadt]

13. Jesus...

How is that remotely a "threat"?

Please.

[Sinistrous]

51. Essentially,

By definition.

You're welcome.

[SDuderstadt]

54. Bullshit...

what the DOJ is saying is that, if Texas enacts this law and tries to enforce it, the TSA will be unable to fulfill its primary responsibility and, thus, will have little choice but to ground all outbound flights.

You need to educate yourself on the definition of "threat", dude.

[Sinistrous]

58. I hope you had fun with your little game. Your expedition into

Newspeak has been silly and annoying, but curiously entertaining.

[SDuderstadt]

61. LOL!

"Newspeak".

LOL!

[Sinistrous]

75. Over your head, eh?

[SDuderstadt]

76. Ummm, no...

Laughable.

[Scuba]

5. "offensive to a reasonable person" Who writes this stuff?

[MrCoffee]

16. The "reasonable person" standard is the primary determination regarding duty of care

Anyone with even a bare minimum of legal knowledge would write it exactly that way.

[SDuderstadt]

19. You're assuming that...

DU's "ready - fire - aim" brigade possesses a bare minimum of legal knowledge.

[Fleshdancer]

6. Does anyone think the feds would actually do this?

I don't. It will be interesting to see how this plays out though.

[MrDiaz]

7. I hope

It gets passed anyways, and if they ground the flights, it wouldn't be too long before other states do the same thing and they will be forced to take the pat downs away. Lol i read something somewhere I can't remember where, but it said that in Israel, suspicious people walk through a explosive proof room and if there is a bomb on there person it would automatically detenate. That would be awesome. lol

[demosincebirth]

9. never heard of that. Have a link?

[MrDiaz]

26. No link

That is why I said i don't remember where I read it, I'm sure it's not real. But if it were, I think it would very effective.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

8. I'll be happy to drive out of state. Or take a bus.

[ileus]

10. Feds are upset they can't molest citizens....humm...

[SDuderstadt]

11. It's pretty silly to think the TSA...

wants to "molest" anyone.

[MadHound]

38. Except for those cases where TSA agents have been arrested for child molestation,

Sexual assault, etc.

[SDuderstadt]

40. You need to study the logical fallacies of...

composition and division, dude.

[MadHound]

42. Interesting how you like to address issues of semantics and logic,

Yet not address the issue itself.

Shows that you have, in actuality, very little to stand on.

[SDuderstadt]

43. Dude...

fallacious arguments cannot prove anything.

[MadHound]

45. Again, addressing style, not substance.

Somehow I think that perfectly describes your character and mindset, all style, no substance.

Goodbye:hi:

[SDuderstadt]

47. Logic isn't about "style"...

dude. It's about validity and soundness, not that I'd expect you to know that.

[Warren DeMontague]

14. "Recklessly the anus"?

Shit, I think I just found my band name.

[stevenleser]

21. I hate when that happens. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

30. Masterpiece Theater Presents: "Great First Half-Sentences In English Literature"

I swear, there's a great novel waiting to come right after those 3 words.

[sudopod]

59. They accidentally the whole thing. nt

[Boojatta]

85. "Recklessly the anus"

All they are saying is: "Don't tutch the but"
It's like "Give peace a chance."

[1awake]

15. thanks to this its dead in the water..or airport. n/t

[SidDithers]

17. Doesn't Texas already have sexual assault and groping laws on the books?...

Are TSA agents exempt from those laws?

Sid

[stevenleser]

18. Its not sexual assault if you consent. When you buy your ticket, there is implied consent to

all the rules and regulations of flying.

[LisaL]

63. WTF are you talking about?

How does buying a ticket implies consent to anything but going from point A to point B?

[SDuderstadt]

65. You agree to FAA regulations...

duh.

[stevenleser]

68. Further to what the other responder said...

Your purchase of the ticket implies that you understand and will obey airline, FAA and any other applicable policies, rules and regulations associated with flying.

Personally, I would love to have two seperate wings at the airport, one with no security policies and one with the current ones. You and others who believe like you do could fly with no security, and I will fly with the current regs.

Of course, you would have a hard time finding pilots and crew who would work the flights from the no security wings, but that would be your problem.

[jberryhill]

73. Because the operation of aircraft is subject to FAA regulations

I do hope you listen to the safety announcement in which they do mention that federal regulations require adherence to all lighted signs, placards, and crew member instructions.

IMHO, it all went downhill when they banned smoking.

[RB TexLa]

86. So you would say I could light up a cigarette on the plane? Since my ticket is only about

flying from point A to B? I do not have to follow that rule?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. How about a compromise? Let the passengers grope the gropers to an equal extent?

And, they can both sing "God Bless America" while doing so.

[SDuderstadt]

22. A far more sober assessment:

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/25/texas-tsa

[krabigirl]

23. Texas should tell them to bring it on. Good for Texas.

[SDuderstadt]

25. Not really...

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/25/texas-tsa

[krabigirl]

28. I still think they should. It's about time someone stands up to this ridiculous stuff.

[SDuderstadt]

29. Well, good for you...

in the meantime, the law is on the TSA's side.

[krabigirl]

31. Thanks. I can't believe democrats have no problem with the overreach of the TSA.

[SDuderstadt]

34. Maybe they have a better grasp of...

the actual facts than you do.

[originalpckelly]

35. The law was also on the side of Jim Crow, slavery, anti-sodomy laws, no vote for women...

I could continue.

The law has been on the side of many unjust things in the history of the world. Please do not attempt a pathetic and transparent plea to authority.

[SDuderstadt]

36. Look up the "Supremacy Clause"...

And quit accusing me of a "plea to authority".

[truebrit71]

24. "The govt reserves it's right to cop a feel from whomever they choose in airports"

What a steaming crock of horseshit...

What fucking country is this again???? :grr:

[jberryhill]

32. It is the country in which operation of aircraft is governed exclusively by FAA regulations

That is what country this is.

The name of the country, btw, is not "Texas".

[truebrit71]

37. So unlawful searches and blatant violations of the 4th amendment..

..are okay in 'your' country...

Because in the country that I live in, America, they have laws...and those laws are being broken...the fact that they are being broken by a governmental agency with the full support of a "liberal" President makes it that much more reprehensible...

[jberryhill]

39. You have to stop putting my posts through Google Translate into Urdu and back

Texas does not regulate air travel, and as long as you mention it, Texas is not the arbiter of the 4th Amendment either.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

46. They aren't "crimes"...

dude.

They are authorized by federal law and regulation.

[truebrit71]

77. I don't speak Urdu, not sure why you think I do..

Texas isn't looking to regulate air travel, nor arbitrate the 4th amendment (although it would be nice if somebody did), they are looking to regulate that conduct of it's citizens in the state of Texas. If the conduct of the TSA staff violates the law, they need to face the consequences.

[SDuderstadt]

79. For the last time...

it doesn't violate the law, which you'd know if you did a little cursory research on the the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution and 4th Amendment case law.

What I find simply astounding is how laymen can read the 4th Amendment, then presume they are qualified to interpret it without considering the interpretations of the USSC and other federal courts. Hint: Texas cannot overrule Congress.

[SDuderstadt]

41. They aren't...

"unlawful searches", dude.

[Shagbark Hickory]

27. I guess this is a call to the airline lobbiests... time to pay your dues.

[lildreamer316]

48. I really can't believe there are people here who think the 4th amendment is obsolete.

Seriously? Where am I again? Jesus.

[SDuderstadt]

49. Maybe you should review...

4th amendment case law.

[COLGATE4]

50. Remember the old adage: Trying to argue legal issues with a

non-lawyer is like trying to teach a pig to sing - it doesn't get you anywhere and it just irritates the pig.

[yawnmaster]

81. and that is very sad. eom

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jmowreader]

60. Let's go at this from another direction...

The TSA is COMPLETELY fucked up and needs to be eliminated. It's got to be done at the federal level, not the state level.

If the government allows a nullification bill to stand, Republican governors backed by GOP statehouses are going to nullify every federal law they don't like, starting with healthcare reform.

[jberryhill]

71. They've already started...

http://www.kypost.com/dpp/news/state/Go-Away-EPA_24892269

FRANKFORT, Ky. - Lawmakers in Kentucky are threatening to give the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency the boot with a largely symbolic measure complaining the agency is over-regulating the state's coal industry.

----

This piece of Texas legislation is part of the secessionist movement rearing its head in a number of states which have decided to challenge areas of exclusive federal authority.

You'll find DUers that support this move by Texas, but seem to recognize the principle when Arizona goes off on its own take on immigration law.

[LisaL]

62. Let them do it. Airlines won't be happy. Passengers won't be happy.

So let them just do it.
Maybe finally people will take notice of what TSA is doing.

[SDuderstadt]

64. "Maybe finally people will take notice of what TSA is doing"

I thought you guys claimed the American public is already outraged. Now you're saying maybe finally people will take notice.

Too funny.

[LisaL]

67. Clearly not outraged enough. And you thought wrong.

I've never claimed the American public is already outraged. Some people certainly are. But clearly not enough people.

[SDuderstadt]

69. Why not?

Simple question.

[kickysnana]

70. I'm with Texas on this one. n/t

[NNN0LHI]

74. Didn't the suicidal good ole boy who flew a plane into a federal building come from Texas?

Joe Stack was his name I think?

Anyone else recall that incident?

Don

[ceile]

78. Happened in Austin.

Still don't know how he managed to only kill himself and one other person..
http://austin.ynn.com/content/267653/daughter-says-pilot-in-austin-irs-crash-misguided

[Scottybeamer70]

84. TSA has never

caught even one single terrorist. Tell me again what it is they do?
They are now talking about trains, busses, and probably other things as well.
When do you suppose they will appear at your front door?.....just sayin'