[TaZ]

"The government agents are protecting a vulnerable border. Those ports are a national security issue as much as any other port or border crossing. The airlines need to focus on flying airplanes, imho, not in providing the whole security system. If threats are found, they need the power to arrest."

Flying from LA to NY is not crossing the "border".

If you have so much disdain for the Constitution, why don't you join the liberals and global elite who want to write a new one?

[HairOfTheDog]

Oh knock it off. don't tell me I have disdain for the Constitution. If you guys weren't over-acting so much I might be able to tell if you even have a point. Right now if you have a rational point, it is lost in emotional hyperbole.

I explained in a different reply exactly why I see no difference between an airport and a border crossing:

There is no difference in the threat posed to us by inter-state flights versus international flights. They are all international airports. I see airports as no different than any other port. It is airport security, not security for each flight based on where it is going to or coming from. It makes no difference whether you are headed from Boulder or Bangladesh. It is still a port, where planes take off that are capable of being hijacked and taken. What possible difference does it make where your plane was headed?