Posted on 03/13/2004 4:54:16 PM PST by BulletBobCo
Edited on 04/22/2004 12:39:14 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Same here. It's simply not worth the aggravation, harassment, nor the risk of a felony charge for making an honest mistake or refusing to take crap off the arrogant Stormtroopers running the checkpoints.
Also, since they don't allow me to fly armed, they jeopardize my safety. And the most important thing is that I make it home safely every night.
Gee, ya think?
Hmmm... if she were flying on 9/11 with her steak knife, and managed to kill a couple of islamofreaks with her evil "weapon", I think you and others here would be applauding her for bravery.
(Too bad everyone didn't have a steak knife on 9/11)
Now she is merely an "idiot" for breaking some bueracratic edict.
Careful. Someone might report you to Homeland Zecurity.
Maybe not, but there have been many reports of these kinds of items being seized at checkpoints. I've seen several such articles right here on FR.
Some things obviously must be prohibited from flights, and there must be a mechanism in place for dealing with violators. The most disturbing revelation in this story IMO is the fact that fines are assessed by one individual, who can take "attitude" into account when making his decision. This arbitrary nonsense is no different than the justice court system, of course, which is yet one more broken element of our judicial system.
MM
You don't get compensated for choosing to use a service that a business provides. Generally, the free market requires you to pay for a service but in no way does it require you to use that service.
Walk.
To compare our current airline system to a "free market" is akin to comparing Madonna to a a virgin.
When people pay for a service, and they do not receive that service (or that service is delayed), they should be entitled to receive compensation for their lost time.
There are quite a number of people who also don't understand that flying is not a Constitutional "right".
Yeah, from morons like Ms Steak Knife, and Mr 38.
So an Air Marshall carrying a knife puts everyone on board at risk?
A person may intentionally or unintentionally break the law for speeding, but if you hit a kid when your going 45 in a 30 MPH zone, you are still responsible for your actions.
And if you hit him at 29 MPH, you're not responsible?
Anyway, I really don't see the correlation.
In the case of someone bringing a steak knife on a plane, there is no victim. In your example, there is a victim.
Getting a fine for speeding is justifiable punishment for putting people at risk
LOL! You think speeding fines are about "punishment"?
There are all about revenue for the state.
But the purpose of the TSA is to make people *feel* more secure about airline travel. Harrassing innocent people makes it look like the TSA is completely on the ball, running a bulletproof, zero-tolerance security operation.
It's all about perception.
Neither can her government without following the "rules" of the 4th amendment:
"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."
How do "free people" handle this issue of "security" while traveling on aircraft?
Not by using an unconstitutional judical dicta of "compelling state interest" and "public safety" as the justification for violating the covenants of the Constitution, particularily the 2nd amendment and the 4th amendment, as well as the 5th amendment.
Free people let the marketplace sort this issue out.
Airlines, private property owners, are to be in control of their property, who they will allow on their aircraft, for what reason they shall refuse to allow their customers on their aircraft, and to what degree they will allow their customers to participate in the defense of their private property.
Free people, living in a free land, under the true covenants of a document, such as the U.S. Constitution, would do the following:
Some airline(s) may say to their potential customer base, fly with my airline and you can bring your arm onto my aircraft to help me secure it against potential hijackers.
Another airline(s) may say to their potential customer base, fly with my airline and I have invested in x-ray equipment and security personnel to search all luggage and persons boarding the aircraft to help secure my airplane against potential hijackers.
Free people, would then have the "choice" to fly on the airline that offers to them the best method of security.
Oh really? Are knives like wild animals, just waiting to leap out of their containers and start slaughering people autonomously? Might make an interesting movie I suppose...
For some reason, the TSA seems to be willfully ignorant of two facts that are much more real than yours:
Sounds like something my wife would do- or a lot of women I know. My wife usually has a couple of scalpels on her person as well.
People carry all manner of things.
A lot of whisky too ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.