Coffee,Tea,or Should We Feel Your Pregnant Wifes Breasts Before Throwing You in a Cell attheAirport?

lewrockwell.com ^ | 12/18/2002 | Nicholas Monahan

[DAnconia55]

And I think you are being a bit overly dramatic to invoke the constitution and all those who died to defend it, over searches for weapons at airports.

Those that died to defend it (in the beginning), and the drafters, would never allow their weapons to be taken at airports.

[ml/nj]

ping

Important reading, I think.

Could this be why the government fears an armed citizenry?

ML/NJ

[gcraig]

Last I heard "utter contempt" doesn't fall under the death by execution category of any law...Federal of otherwise.

Utter contempt is beyond hatred. If I am threatened I will protect myself and my family with my 2nd amendment rights. I never said I would condone execution in this case. I merely said that if I am threatened with utter contempt, then I fully intend to protect myself.

That said, I really shouldn't post anything to FR after having a few beers. I'm sorry that my remarks were more extreme than necessary.

[DAnconia55]

Betwen the unions and the elimination of the casual traveler, commercial aviation may be finished as we knew it.

They'll socialize it. Surely you know that's coming...

[HairOfTheDog]

Those that died to defend it (in the beginning), and the drafters, would never allow their weapons to be taken at airports.

I think it is ridiculous to predict that. Fine.... all you guys, go for it... get pissy in airports. Get yourself arrested if that makes you feel like a patriot. I think it is a waste of energy on a really questionable cause.

[DAnconia55]

Travel is a right. It is not, and cannot be, an absolute and unregulated right

Certainly it is.
Unless you have a warrant, you cannot detain me.

The opposite of detention is mobility.

[DAnconia55]

And what, precisely, does it mean to make interstate commerce "regular"?

It means to prevent states from enacting trade barriers between other states. Tarrifs, regulations and laws to prevent free trade among the internal US states.

[DAnconia55]

I suggest that the Ninth Amendment gives me the right to free health care for the rest of my natural life, daily sexual favors from the female citizen of my choice, and a salary for sitting around and watching TV. Unfortunately for both of us, the Ninth Amendment does not speak to which of us is correct in our assertions of our rights - indeed, we both could be right under the rather spare language of the Ninth Amendment...

Baloney. You don't have a right to something that belongs to someone else. The founders, and the general population at the time understood this.

Why are you arguing like democrat?

[Sally'sConcerns]

I have been a white knuckled flyer for a very long time. I DO fly when necessary to get to where I want to go. I haven't flown in 3-4 years and given all of the horror stories I probably won't.

I'm green eyed, blonde, short, slender (err, maybe even kinda skinny) and caucasion. In no way am I a threat to national security! but after reading all of the stories about those that are chosen for 'special' searches, it will be a cold day in hell before I fly again!

[DAnconia55]

Those that died to defend it (in the beginning), and the drafters, would never allow their weapons to be taken at airports.

I think it is ridiculous to predict that.

---

Then you utterly fail to understand your own history. The framers/founders and the armed men of the era would never allow their weapons to be confiscated for any reason whatsoever.

And especially not for pretend safety.

[ChemistCat]

I just wanted to say thanks for a splendid discussion overnight. I side with Exodus almost completely, but GR made a great case for the other side.

Much hinges on the word "reasonable" in this discussion. Keeping Richard Reids off planes is in everyone's best interest, of course. The ways to be absolutely sure of this number in the dozens. Flying naked is the most extreme; searching EVERYONE is another extreme. But what do you do to be sure of your pilots? Your flight attendants? There is no absolute security, obviously.

My preference would be to pre-screen all travelers. Let the trusted travelers on unhindered unless they give substantive cause to require search. Search EVERYBODY else, but do it respectfully.

Everywhere I go now, I am scrutinized and treated as a potential criminal. We all are. And there are surely criminals around--people who take because they are too lazy to work for and earn what they want. I had $40 worth of bottled water stolen right off my porch last week. I was asked to help a fellow student cheat on the final exam in a class I was taking this past fall. You bet I reported it; he was asking me to risk 140-plus credit hours of hard work and the hope that soon I'll actually get a degree. I am TIRED of standing in and taking the punishment for criminals just because they haven't all been caught. That goes for terrorism. I want THEM punished, not me. I want to be able to carry a gun, spend my own money, try to better myself without government permission. I want the right to educate my children as I see fit. I want to be able to buy a toilet that works.

I don't blow up buildings, but I am the one who faces punitive searches should I fly. I don't steal, but I'm the one who must be carefully watched entering and leaving a store. I don't rape children, but my children cannot roam the neighborhood because we've given the streets to the abductors and rapists. They have rights. I have restrictions. WHY must the honest, decent people give way again and again and again to the bad guys? Why must I be confined while the bad guys roam free?

I'll tell you why. Because of political correctness. Because the liberal peaceniks can't stand to do the hardest thing of all--take out the evildoers who hate our civilization, who have proclaimed THEMSELVES our enemy. That is what they are, whether they highjack planes or swipe water bottles: enemies to civilization! Look at what Happygal said. She thinks I want to put a bullet in the head of a stranger. No. I want to put a bullet in the head of the many strangers who have declared that they want my babies dead. They proclaimed themselves my enemy. I did not go out seeking harm to them. They seek my blood. I have the God-given right to defend my family, to demand my government defend me--but what is happening? My government wants me to hide, to submit to more restrictions! Don't like it--don't fly? God gave ME physics too. Aviation is MINE, my birthright as a member of western civilization.

I do not believe anyone has the right to make me pay my dignity in order to fly. If I work and earn the price of a ticket, and I cannot harm anyone else by flying, my place in the sky should not be subject to government approval.

[general_re]

You can hardly hope to overthrow the current order by conceding its legitimacy.

You really have two choices. One, you can work within the system to try to change it by persuading others that your ideas are better. Of course, by doing that, you are implicitly conceding the legitimacy of the laws you oppose by participating in the same process that produced those laws, but arguing that they are wrong or a bad idea or some such. Or, you can refuse to concede their legitimacy, and embark instead on a campaign of civil disobedience and non-compliance with the laws that currently exist. In this case, pragmatic soul that I am, I suggest that the first option is somewhat more likely to succeed than the second.

[general_re]

...he only survives by pretending that he doesn't understand what I've said.

One of the truly touching things about many libertarians is that they are completely convinced of the self-evidence of their position, and therefore it is presumed to be absolutely impossible for someone to examine the evidence and reach a different conclusion - instead, disagreeing is a sign of dishonesty or delusion, take your pick....

[Republic of Texas]

Actually the freedom to move about, UNHINDERED, is a fundemental freedom of this country, and one that sets us apart from the rest of the world.

[general_re]

You are free to say anything you want, as long as you don't defame someone.

So, in other words, my right to speak is not absolute - I am not permitted to defame you, as you agree. Wisely so, I think.

Now that we've agreed that the right to speak is not absolute, let's apply that very same logic so that we may come to understand that none of your rights can be absolute. Once we realize that, the argument becomes not whether we should draw a line restricting that right, but rather where that line should be drawn. You seem to think that it should be drawn in such a way as to prevent consensual searches, in much the same way that you think a line should be drawn across the First Amendment preventing defamation. Most people disagree with you on the searches, but agree with you on defamation. But if you persuade enough people to move the line on the Fourth Amendment, it will be so. Good luck.

[general_re]

A contract forced on a man by denying him access to a necessary thing if he refuses to sign is void under the law.

Again, the fact that you consider a thing to be necessary to you does not make it a right that society is obligated to provide. Everyone needs money to survive, but that does not obligate society to provide it to you.

After all, you still have the right to travel, but you do not have a right to that particular conveyance.

[general_re]

You are free to quit your job if you don't want to be searched without reason.

We're going in circles here. Again, the mere fact that you do not care for any of the choices before you does not in and of itself obligate someone else to provide you with a choice you like.

[HairOfTheDog]

Well, we also have a problem here, with people who want to board planes intent on killing everyone on them. I understand wanting your own defense, I am a gun-nut, but I am not convinced that a gun is the right weapon for anyone to have on a crowded airplane. I think it is dangerous. I agree that an armed populace is a great deterrent, just maybe not a good idea on an airplane. There is not one structure on an airplane that will stop a bullet, and that structure is not only full of innocents, which is not to be forgotten in any scenario, but also fuel tanks, engines, hydraulic and electrical lines, and all kinds of vital things that can be broken, making the situation no better, and indeed worse.

And I don't think it is wrong to ask someone to disarm for a trip in someone else's plane. It isn't yours, and you don't have a right to be there. You buy a ticket, agreeing to the terms of the contract. That is the rule of law.

You don't want yourself or pregnant women searched, and yet, would not maybe make a stink about a middle eastern man being searched. I agree with searching the middle eastern man. I just also think that failing to search blonde women leaves us pretty vulnerable to a blind spot.

[semaj]

"They are breeding it out of us, conditioning us... and then they have all kinds of high tech toys to stop it..."

Question: What do all their high-tech toys have in common?

[general_re]

Certainly it is.

Travel is an absolute, unrestricted right? I can travel in any fashion I like, under any circumstances I choose?