GOP lawmaker: Full-body scanners violate Fourth Amendment

[sabra]

Source: The Hill

A GOP lawmaker said Tuesday the full-body scanners now employed by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) violate the Fourth Amendment to the constitution, which protects against "unreasonable searches and seizures."

During a one-minute speech on the House floor, Rep. Ted Poe (Texas) also blasted former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff as a "political hack" and accused him of profiting from the proliferation of the devices.

"There is no evidence these new body scanners make us more secure. But there is evidence that former Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff made money hawking these full body scanners," Poe said.

He went on to explain that Chertoff, who served under President George W. Bush, had given interviews promoting the scanners while he was "getting paid" to sell them.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/129651-gop-lawmaker-full-body-scanners-violate-fourth-amendment

[Blue Owl]

1. That's as corrupt as our Supreme Court

:mad:

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. He's talking like a Democrat!

Somebody recruit him, quick!

He's absolutely right, BTW.

Recommended.

[Chulanowa]

3. He's probably ultra-batfuck insane on everything else to make up for it...

But yeah, glad to have some sense from the Republicans every now and then.

[WhiteTara]

24. here's a snip from his bio at his website

On the bench, Judge Poe garnered national media attention for his creative sentencing for criminals and hard-nosed approach to enforcing the law. Dubbed by the media as “Poetic Justice” punishments, he ordered thieves to carry signs in front of stores from which they stole; commanded sex offenders to place warning signs on their homes after serving jail time; and directed murderers to place a photo of their victims on the wall of their prison cells reminding them of their crime.

[sabra]

6. don't know much about him, but do know he went after KBR\Halliburton a few years back

http://vrc.poe.house.gov/About/Accomplishments.htm

Accomplishments

The Congressional Victims’ Rights Caucus is a proven and effective leader in advocating for crime victims. During its three year existence, the Caucus took the lead in protecting programs that provide critical financial support for victim services throughout the nation, including the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) and Violence Against Women’s Act (VAWA). The Caucus was also instrumental in the enactment of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 and has co-sponsored resolutions recognizing National Crime Victims’ Rights Week, National Domestic Violence Awareness Month, National Stalking Awareness Month, National Peace Officers’ Memorial Day, and National Remembrance for Murder Victims.

Please see our "Legislation" tab for more information on what VRC Members are doing to promote victims' rights and issue awareness.

Jamie Leigh Jones

Jamie Leigh Jones was a contractor for Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR), a former subsidiary of Halliburton, working in the Green Zone in Iraq in 2005. Within four months of her arrival, 20-year old Jamie was drugged and gang-raped by her KBR coworkers. The extent of her injuries was so severe that she later required reconstructive surgery. Jamie was held hostage in a ship cargo container for 24 hours without any food or water. After a time, she was able to convince one of the people guarding her to let her borrow his cell phone. Jamie then called her dad in Texas, pleading for help and rescue.

Immediately upon hearing from his daughter, Jamie’s father called his Congressional Representative, Judge Ted Poe. Congressman Poe and his staff were able to contact the right people in the State Department and within 48 hours two agents from the embassy in Baghdad found and rescued Jamie.

While in Baghdad, Jamie was examined by Army doctors who performed a forensic sexual assault examination. This examination is commonly called a rape kit. Doctors take forensic samples from a sexual assault victim that are then preserved as evidence for trial. For some unknown reason, Army doctors turned this rape kit over to Jamie’s employer, Halliburton KBR. KBR then “lost” the rape kit. When it was found later, it had obviously been tampered with, and crucial photographs and the Army doctor’s cover sheet with medical findings were missing. These materials are critical for the prosecution of rapists.

Once home, Jamie bravely testified before Congress, urging the Department of Justice to pursue rapes that occur abroad. Currently the DOJ has not filed a suit in Jamie’s case of in similar cases that have since arisen. Congressman Poe continues to monitor this situation and bring attention to the fact that federal agencies are not prosecuting the heinous crimes of contractors abroad.

[Wwagsthedog]

9. Hon. Ted Poe

Former Harris (Houston) County court judge. He handed down some very interesting sentences.

[musette_sf]

28. Ah, you remember Hanging Judge Poe too.

Kind of like the punishment Larry got on "Curb Your Enthusiasm" for inadvertently taking the fork from the restaurant...

[Lance_Boyle]

11. Would you believe Freerepublic is on the same page as us on this issue?

INCLUDING the bits about Chertoff profiting from the Rapescans. Blatant violation of rights makes strange bedfellows...

[MattyGroves]

13. Yeah but just like everything else started by Bush they act like it started under Obama

Read through the threads. Even when they decry the TSA they act like this all started under Obama.

Do you think Rush and Hannity are going to remind their listeners who is responsible for the creation of the TSA?

[mommalegga]

19. Ummm to be honest...

It was the Dems who insisted on the airport security being "federalized" thus the TSA. The Repubs were content to let the rent-a-cops contunue doing it.

[customerserviceguy]

30. I used to lurk over there

and many were sounding the alarm over the post 9/11 measures. I even remember some saying, "We wouldn't have trusted Clinton with these laws, why is it any different when it is our own President who's doing this?"

[CaliforniaPeggy]

14. Woah..........that IS bizarre.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, though...

:shrug:

[mommalegga]

18. Quick, someone check the temperature in hell!....NT

[customerserviceguy]

29. We've finally found something

that both the left and the right can agree on, it seems.

What's next, full body cavity searches? The next jihadi to smuggle a bomb up his butt will cause that, if the TSA follows it's 'logical' progression.

[musette_sf]

4. Love or hate old Toothbrush Ted,

he always has called them as he sees them.

[GiordanoBruno]

5. Where are the Democrats on this?

We need leaders not mice!

[PSPS]

7. Since the GOP has always been in control regardless of election outcomes, maybe now this will stop.

Just abolish the useless TSA theater in its entirety.

[baldguy]

8. And where was he when Bush, Cheney & Chertoff started promoting these things five years ago?

[struggle4progress]

10. I dislike the scanners and will opt for patdowns myself. But

this is largely political games. If TSA doesn't engage in random scans/patdowns, the alternatives are:

(1) No scans/patdowns
(2) Scans/patdowns based on a checklist/profile
(3) Universal scans/patdowns

Going route (1) guarantees complaints about the lack of security and guarantees loud outrage over any future security problems. Route (2) requires adequate checklist/profile knowledge -- but, of course, there's really no way to know for certain who constitutes a security threat, so this again guarantees loud outrage over any future security problems. Route (3) is fairest but is invasive and will slow air travel -- so guarantees loud outrage

Bottom line: there's just no way to avoid noisy outrage on this topic.

And Poe is a noisy wacko: ... Poe was appointed a felony court judge in Harris County in 1981 ... In a story that is part of jailhouse lore in Texas, he reportedly told a defendant at sentencing of his intention to throw some pennies in the air and, however many hit the ground, would be the number of years the defendant was going to serve. After flinging an entire jar of pennies, he informed the man that the sentence would be twenty years ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Poe

[mommalegga]

20. We should adopt the Isreali model....

seems to have worked well for them; no groping or nude scans required.

If not, what will the TSA do once the first rectal bomber is caught/succeeds? Butt cheek spreading?

[boppers]

31. Uhm, the Israeli model has massive costs, and some liabilities.

How many checks do you want on the *way* to the cabin? How many soldiers with automatic weapons do you want in the airport? How many do you want on the planes? How much will it cost to man-trap the cockpit doors on all planes? How many people are you willing to have search your underwear, inspect your medications? Are you okay with brown people being singled out? How about more expensive flights to pay for missile counter-measures? Increased plane weight (and flight costs) for reinforced planes? Not just one "no fly list", but *five*?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al#Security

[customerserviceguy]

32. What about a 'trusted traveler' program?

Charge me a hundred bucks, do a background investigation on me, and issue me a card that I can slap into a machine, squint into a retina scanner to verify it's me, then let me bring a few bottles of wine or beer home with me, without further ado.

The vast majority of travelers are people who fly frequently enough that the TSA should be able to keep tabs on them to know that they would never pose a threat to anyone. Search the crap out of everyone else, that's not profiling, that's just checking out those that are unknown to the system.

[Jack_DeLeon]

33. I'd say we stick with option #1 there...

metal detectors and bomb residue detecting are good enough.

We havent had any issues because of the former system failing. When 9/11 happened it was perfectly legal to have box cutters on planes.

Apparently these X-Ray machines cannot see through a person so its not like it could stop a terrorist from having something surgically planted in their body or stuck up their ass anyways.

[Warren Stupidity]

35. 1 is working just fine. ZERO deaths from in plane attacks since 9-11.

You've bought into the phony crisis.

[DBoon]

12. NOW they care

not a peep out of them when Bush was in charge and shoved the Patriot Act though and set up wiretapping rooms

[JDPriestly]

15. OK, Mr. President, here is the issue on which you reach across the aisle.

Left and right, we agree that the scanners must go. Their use invades our privacy, and we should at least have a right to privacy as to our beer bellies, the state of our underwear and our breast implants (don't have any, but what if I did) and -- oh yes, the size of our nipples and other private organs.

Please. The only people who have to see that much of me other than my doctor or my radiologist are me and my husband. Nobody else. Actually, I suspect that the scanner shows more of me than anyone needs to see other than a radiologist.

Yet another waste of our tax dollars.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

16. I don't understand why bomb-detecting dogs can't be used

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/19-billion-later-pentagon-best-bomb-detector-is-a-dog/

They might sniff at close quarters; but at least they wouldn't be getting their jollies by groping or ogling people.

[happygoluckytoyou]

23. yeah.... one guy jingles my junk while his dog sniffs my butt... how many $single$ can i afford ???

add it a lap dance from Meg Whitman and I'll go broke

[slackmaster]

38. Because some people are allergic to dogs, and some people (e.g. Muslims) find them offensive

They're also expensive to maintain.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

40. The studies show that they're more effective than machines...

which seems like it would make them more cost effective as well.
I can understand allergy issues, but would think there would be ways to work around that, such as using hypo-allergenic dogs.
Could dogs be considered more offensive than being groped, or having one's private parts on display for anyone to see?

[orbitalman]

17. Oh shit. Everything violates the constitution. n/t

[Moonwalk]

21. Are such searches a violation of the 4th Amendment? Ignoring any other problems--

--the scanners have, like whether they might not be good for us or if Chertoff got paid to sell them (which would be enough for me to say we should stop 'em and demand our money back)...is it a violation of the 4th amendment when the person can say "no" to such a search (provided, of course, that they're willing to forego flying)?

What I mean is, TSA isn't stopping people on the street, saying they're suspected of some illegal activity and searching them whether they want it or not. TSA is saying, on behalf of the airport and airlines (presumably) that if they want to fly, they have to go through these security measures. No one has to agree to them. But if they don't, they don't fly.

I honestly don't know if it measures up to an unreasonable search if you willing go through it in order to get something rather than being subjected to it unwillingly. Can anyone with legal knowledge tell me if it passes muster as an illegal and unreasonable search if there is a quid-pro-quo in going through with it?

[LisaL]

26. Let's say you have to go through this before

allowed to enter every grocery shop. One can make the same argument-if you don't want to be scanned or groped just don't buy groceries. I seriously can't understand how TSA gets away with it all.

[Moonwalk]

34. But I need food to live. No groceries and I starve. Flying might be--

--important to my job or to visit friends and family, but I'm not necessarily going to die without it.

[Warren Stupidity]

37. please re-read the 4th

'I need to' is not relevant.

[happygoluckytoyou]

22. JUST CARRY A COUPLE SINGLE$ and offer it to the guy who jingles your junk.... got to love them back

[DCKit]

27. +1

As someone who doesn't often get touched in that "special" way, I might even give 'em an additional boness.

[sofa king]

25. Oh, maybe before George Bush, Antonin Scalia, and the Patriot Act.

Now that guy is just another liberal whiner.

[alarimer]

36. I hate to say this, but this Republican is absolutely right.

The Democrats are too busy trying to prove they are "tough on terror" to see how much of a violation these procedures are. And they are useless.

[slackmaster]

39. I agree with him

The screening to get onto an airplane shouldn't be any different than what you go through to get into a courthouse.

X-ray and metal detector, no problem. Bomb-sniffing machine, no problem.

Hands off.