House votes to protect 'John Does' on flights

[seriousstan]

Source: washington times

House Republicans tonight surprised Democrats with a procedural vote to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity -- the first step by lawmakers to protect "John Doe" airline travelers already targeted in such a lawsuit.
After a heated debate and calls for order, the motion to recommit the Democrats' Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee with instructions to add the protective language passed on a vote of 304-121.
Republicans said the lawsuit filed by six Muslim imams against US Airways and "John Does," passengers who reported suspicious behavior, could have a "chilling effect" on passengers who may fear being sued for acting vigilant.


---cut---

Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi Democrat and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, opposed the motion over loud objections from colleagues on the House floor, forcing several calls to order from the chair.
"Absolutely they should have the ability to seek redress in a court of law," said Mr. Thompson, who suggested that protecting passengers from a lawsuit would encourage racial profiling.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070327-065522-5346r.htm

[youngdem]

1. Why does this make me suspect that the John Does are really not real people

And actually are hiding fake 'reports' by 'John Does' to justify profiling or to hide the real method of discovery to justify a search. Perhaps Repubs are immunizing these 'John Does' to halt discovery?

Just doesn't ring true that Republicans would jump to the defense of any member of the public for any really 'magnanimous' reason. I mean, I know they would love to protect fellow racist profilers who nervously call the FBI from the plane every time a Sikh gets on a flight, but I still don't buy the reasoning. Especially since they are pretty damn busy these days with full time ass covering. All actions they take are likely desperately necessary to cover something. Somthing's fishy here.

[sasha031]

2. Remember the Latino last yr around Xmas

Some said he had a bomb, then they said he never said it, this ia Miami. He had just came back from a humanitarian mission.

The nut job marshals they have on flights blew him to pieces....

I will never forget that one, what a wonderful XMas gift from the US government for his family.

[bluestateguy]

3. I might be able to support this bill

Depends on the language of the bill. If people have a reasonable basis to be suspicious, they should not have to worry about being sued if they tell the plane crew. On the other hand, people who knowingly make false or frivolous complaints to the plane crew simply because they don't want to fly with Arabs or Muslims, they should be fair game for being sued.

[torrentprime]

4. Politically:

Don't fight this one. A winner for the GOP, and best to make it bi-partisan and let it go.

It is scary to think that if you report behavior that you think is suspicious you can be sued by large organizations with tons of money for civil rights violations. The "chilling" effect seems very, very real.