Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BulletBobCo
"Susan Brown Campbell doesn’t consider herself a threat to the friendly skies."

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.

37 posted on 03/13/2004 6:14:27 PM PST by tahiti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: tahiti
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.

Very good post. I concur will all of your arguments.

And if an airline would allow the American people to fly armed, I'd buy a ticket tommorrow simply on principle.

43 posted on 03/13/2004 6:44:17 PM PST by Mulder (Fight the future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: tahiti
Free people let the marketplace sort this issue out.

Obviously the free market solution to this would be a private airline that only allows natural-born US citizens as passengers, and refuses to allow Muslims to fly, ever.

I don't know if that's legal -- I doubt it -- but it'd make a ton of money.

46 posted on 03/13/2004 6:48:19 PM PST by WillL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: tahiti
You must be flying to a reciprical state
77 posted on 03/13/2004 9:13:42 PM PST by KingofQue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson