Posted on 01/23/2012 3:06:21 PM PST by Texas Fossil
By Sunlen Miller @sunlenmiller
Rand Paul’s Pat-Down Standoff With TSA in Nashville Ends
Sen. Rand Paul told his communications director this morning he was being detained by TSA at the Nashville airport.
The Twitter account associated with Paul staffer Moira Bagley, @moirabagley, tweeted around 10 a.m., ET, “Just got a call from @senrandpaul. He’s currently being detained by TSA in Nashville.”
A TSA spokesman disputed that Paul was ever “detained.” But he was not granted access to the secure area of the airport when he tried to board a flight Monday morning.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
I can’t say I am sorry for him..
As a traveler I am no fan of the TSA however had Rand Paul followed the normal procedures and done what all the rest of us do then this would all have taken just a few minutes and would have been no big deal.
_____________________________________________
Your perspective on this is what is turning our country into a totalitarian fascist state.
I never thought I'd be defending Ron Paul, Rand Paul, or any of the rest of that group, but they are right.
33 posted on Monday, January 23, 2012 6:19:23 PM by xkaydet65: “He, in the course of his duty when the Senate is in session, cannot be detained from travelling to and from the Senate. It was placed in the Constitution to prevent people using LEOs to keep lesgislators from appearing to vote. In the course of doing their constitutional duty, they are different.Rand Paul was stopped from entering the secure area and was prevented from leaving the area with the detectors.”
44 posted on Monday, January 23, 2012 6:58:43 PM by Texas Fossil: “Original intent both federal and state is to prevent opposition from detaining by law enforcement as a means to change the outcome in a House or Senate vote. If they are detained and not present they cannot vote.”
For whatever it's worth, this is not mere theory.
Our Founding Fathers knew their history, and knew the British Parliament's history, including efforts of the King to arrest Oliver Cromwell and other Members of Parliament.
The bar on arresting sitting members of a legislative body exists for very good reason.
Picking a fight with either Ron Paul or Rand Paul was an incredibly bad idea for the TSA, but it may have positive outcomes for the rest of us citizens who do not have Congressional privileges.
Thanks
He is both a Liar and a Fraud. The Obastard.
In other words a lying Commie Bastard.
A genius in his writing.........
Oh yes, it is tempting to say, “Let them follow the same rules the rest of us peons have to!”
Except that Rand Paul has publicly stood up for our point of view on the TSA, and, one of the primary complaints here about the TSA is the total lack of common sense in determining who may be a ‘threat’ to other travelers.
So, I guess U.S. Senators are just as much of a threat as Abu Noballs, and should be screened and groped thoroughly, just like little girls, nuns, grandmothers and pilots.
Don’t have to fly for business anymore, so I don’t fly at all.
Rand Paul leading the fight? Great. Where’s Newt? Seems like Newt would get additional support by promising to reform the TSA.
Ditto!
Legalize the restoration of freedom:
Abolish the TSA.
Abolish the Dept of Homeland (in)Security.
Repeal the (un)Patriot Act.
Repeal the 13th amendment.
Abolish the Federal Reserve.
Demand strict adherence to the oath given to defend the Constitution.
I’m still allowed to dream of freedom, right?
I’m so totally for personal liberties, but given the threats of terrorism and using a 747 as a large fuel bomb to take out a building, what are you suggesting in place of our current Airport Security? Nothing?
Personally, losing some privacy/personal liberty in boarding flights doesn’t bother me as much as being hijacked.
I’d like a serious discussion on how you (or anybody here) would improve the system or do you guys think airport security is completely unnecessary?
:)
This is standing operating procedure at the airports for TSA. The TSA agents don't have actual arrest powers, and so they have agreements with state and local police authorities to do the dirty work for them when they need a passenger dealt with.
Ever notice all the state police wandering around any particular airport? Well that's why they're there, to haul non-compliant passengers away whenever TSA gives them the nod.
And you're completing missing the point of what happened and what is being discussed here.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
My thoughts as well, mi amigo.
Reckon the media will do the story about it being ok for the Klansmsn Byrd to whip out constitution to avoid traffic tickets?
Alan, I’d also like to see a serious discussion about national security issues and airplane travel.
But what happened with a sitting United States Senator is multiple orders of magnitude worse. I agree with very little of what Rep. Ron Paul says, and I probably agree with very little of what Sen. Rand Paul says, but it has been a precedent in Anglo-American jurisprudence dating back to the **ENGLISH CIVIL WAR** in the 1600s (actually it was an established rule even before then) that sitting members of legislative bodies cannot be detained, arrested, or otherwise interfered with in their official duties or en route to perform them.
If detaining a sitting United States Senator and barring him from using his cell phone to contact anyone isn’t a violation of Constitutional principles, I don’t know what possibly could be. Yes, I know it was probably a mistake, but the mistake needs to get fixed -— PRONTO!!!!
The last time something like that was tried by a chief executive, it was King Charles I and the violation of parliamentary immunity involved in his attempt to arrest MP Oliver Cromwell was one of the incidents that touched off a war betwee the king and parliament.
The issues really **ARE** that serious. A republic cannot function if the chief executive can detain members of the legislative body.
I’m sure we’ll learn more in the future, but I don’t care who the senator was or what he believed — TSA needs to be told to make sure this never happens again. The only possible exception I can see is if Sen. Rand Paul didn’t identify himself as a senator and just appeared to be an obnoxious passenger, in which case his privilege from arrest would not apply because it was never invoked.
71 posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2012 3:15:26 AM by AlanGreenSpam: “I’m so totally for personal liberties, but given the threats of terrorism and using a 747 as a large fuel bomb to take out a building, what are you suggesting in place of our current Airport Security? Nothing? Personally, losing some privacy/personal liberty in boarding flights doesn’t bother me as much as being hijacked. I’d like a serious discussion on how you (or anybody here) would improve the system or do you guys think airport security is completely unnecessary?”
Rand, as Ron’s son, was detained on the day of a Republican debate. How about that.
W Bush’s creation of DHS-—the gift that keeps giving
now that they’re free from worry over being fired they can really give the winky a good yank.
Yes, W created this monster in the wake of 9/11.
There were many here who saw the danger carried forward at the time.
Old Chinese Proverb: “Today’s problems were often yesterday’s solutions.”
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.