Rapiscan and your rights

[nadinbrzezinski]

The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either, Benjamin Franklin

Are they safe? I don't care if they are "safe." What they are is the next step in the illusion of safety. Living in a free country entails certain risks, and those include in the modern world, a plane brought down by a fanatic. It is not that we have had more planes come down over the last few years than at any time before... it is the reaction and the daily doses of fear. And some folks just lap it up, and demand even more surrender of rights, to feel safe.

So I don't care if the Rapidscan is safe or not, medically that is... it is yet another surrender of rights, for a false sense of security.

The land of the free and the brave is now the land of the scared and the manageable.

Be afraid is the current mantra, after all fear is essential for tyranny to rise. And at this point I don't give a hoot who is in the White House... the policies of Empire continue unabated and this is about money...

So I ask you to read this again, and understand it.

The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either.

Because this is what all these incremental mommy devices are doing. You are trading a false sense of security for elemental freedoms. Rapidscan... just the fourth amendment.

Here you go

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

So how many other fundamental rights are you willing to give up? How far down the rabbit hole do we go?

Mommy, mommy I am afraid? Or We are adults, and there is certain risk in oh going through life.

[demigoddess]

1. you have a right not to fly on their airplanes, and hope they go into bankruptcy.

that is my plan.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. I have to fly from time to time

as going to see parents in Mexico City is not a drivable distance. But the point is how many people, even here, are willng to give up those rights for a false sense of being "safe."

Well they now traded fear of the "terrarist" for fear of the state. That latter one is coming.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. I guess we are ready to sacrifice the Fourth Ammendment

Okie dokie.

[Ozymanithrax]

4. I fly occasionally.

What I want is something that annoys me the least. Since I always fly with a 5 and a 7 year old, my tolerance for annoyance is huge.

The airlines won't go bankrupt because they provide an absolutely critical and necessary service in the modern world. I would love to see a combination of high speed rail, freight, and light commuter rail to fulfill our transportation needs, but the infrastructure was wiped out when the U.S. embraced the auto culture and we are not going back.

There are a sufficient number of people who are offended by some guy torching off his underwear, that the U.S. Government must act. It would have been satisfying if Obama said, "Freedom is dangerous guys. IN order to be free we must sometime risk being incinerated by explosives rubbed into the skid marks on some guys underwear." I am offended by the notion that annoying me more than a bored 5 and 7 year old couped up in an airplane passes for safety. Freedom is dangerous, and exercising freedom should not equate to an act of sedition.

But, though it is far easier to send a Airmail package and take down an airplane, no terrorist has done that. Even Pan Am Flight 103 (Lockerbie bombing) was taken down by a bomb in passenger luggage, though the bomber was not on the plane. (That is why we get all the stupid warnings about packing our own luggage.) Some of them have engineering degrees, including Bin Laden, who is a very smart, very dedicated, and very willing to kill; so thy can figure that out if I can. The question remains, how do we protect against the threat, which is usually going to be a man between 20 and 40 flying on the aircraft that he intends to destroy.

I am not agreeable to strip searching all Muslim men, or shooting them, or nuking their countries. How do we know that blond haired blue eyed guy over there with the bible in his hand isn't a secret Muslim? So annoying everyone of us seems to be the only viable alternative to address the threat.

The question, of course, is should we address the threat? Is it severe enough to go to such measures? What are the rammifications of simply letting it go? Does Rapidiscan adress that threat?

Of course, I am happy to go back to pre 9/11 security. Freedom is dangerous, and the chance of being taken down by a terrorist is microscopic. We are far more likly to be murdered by people we know and love. But the security system used should address the threat. Until they start using the U.S. Mail to go postal on aircraft, annoying individuals who fly is all we can do.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. What bothers me is that people are willing to surrender fundamental rights

due to fear...

There is much more that needs to be done that is not theater that is not done... while the theater is done to frighten and cow a population.

This is WHY Chicago did not get the games... FEAR.

[Ozymanithrax]

7. The question is, would you quit flying?

I'd gladly sign on to a lawsuit stating that Rapidascan is illegal search and seisure. It should be tested. I would really look forward to the SCOTUS decision on such a case. If that is true, does searching our lugage constitute unlawful search and seisure? Does taking off my shoes and forcing everyone to smell my feet?

But, I'm not going ot quit flying when I need to. There is no viable alternative, though a long train trip to Mexico City would be fun.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. If that was a choice for me, I would

[county worker]

6. It will be payback for them when they look at my old wrinkled bod!

[Odin2005]

8. K&R

The risk of things like terrorist attacks is the price one pays for a free society, rather then having a police state.

[BrklynLiberal]

10. I would think that just the opposite is true.

These are the harbingers of a police state.

check out the Benjamin Franklin quote.

[Odin2005]

11. Ack, I meant the risk of terrorist attack and whatnot, not the scanners.

:sorry I didn't make myself clear.

[BrklynLiberal]

46. :D

:thumbsup: :hi:

[dysfunctional press]

12. i don't find it to be an 'unreasonable' search for people who want to board a guided missile.

it's not like they're setting the machines up on street corners and forcing the public at large to be screened, after all...it's a very specific group of people who are subject to it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. That is comming

once they get a group used to it...

[dysfunctional press]

19. only in the minds of the ultra-paranoid.

what other airport security measures have they begun stopping people in the general public to perform...?

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. You truly believe that we shan't have security contgrol meassures

outside an airport?

Should I introduce you to oh cameras?

Oh wait, they are just a figment of my imagination and yes I should be checking myself in for unrestrained paranoia.

Perhaps you should also look up things like oh the misuse of a certain vehicle device that lets your movements be traced... or conversations listened to (and it has been done, improperly so, but it has)

No, the acceptance of this because it makes you feel safer is telling...

This ain't any longer the land of the free, but the land of the scared and utterly cowed.

[dysfunctional press]

33. "This ain't any longer the land of the free, but the land of the scared and utterly cowed."

funny- i don't feel scared or utterly cowed at all...

like the song says- "paranoia, self-destroyer..."

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. Why you accept this without even questioning.

RIGHT...

Have a good day...

[dysfunctional press]

38. i do question it-

i question why rational people are so freaked out by it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. I'm betting Mr. Franklin would be laughing his ass off

A republic madam, if you can keep it.

A republic, a free republic, if you can keep it. Well the republic is gone and the last illusions of freedom are falling away. I question why otherwise rational and intelligent people cannot see that. Then again, when the Roman Republic felt, people didn't see it either, and the same can be said by many other Republics.

RIP, it had a good run.

[dysfunctional press]

44. what level of airport security IS acceptable to you...?

obviously, none right?- if you're going to claim that we shouldn't give up any freedoms in the name of security- do you favor doing away with airport/airline security completely?

if not...why not?

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. Not quite

again having a clue helps.

There are certain measures that can be taken right now that will make your travel that much safer. They are not since they inconvenience business. They have to do with air cargo by the way.

There are others that are taken because they make YOU feel safer, when they are not that effective. Free hint, sending your shoes down the X-Ray machine might make you feel safer, but some explosives will go through that, no problem.

That is the problem.

And once you take the time to educate yourself, well a lot of this comes down to silliness.

There is more. It does not matter how much money we spend on technology, because no amount of technology will make you 100% safe. There is this thing called the human element.

Now if you believe that all this silliness makes you safe, by all means, believe what you want. You are neither free or safe.

So security comes down to a return on investment. It reaches a point where the return is ridiculously small. By the way the threat is real, but how do we deal with it? And sadly rapidscan would not have caught the undie bomber either. He'd be rather well endowed, but since nobody connected certain dots, the technology would not have caught him either.

But don't mind me, as I said, I do have some knowledge on this, and realize when some of it is pure theater. I know that most of this is a human element, or human elements... and no amount of technology will change that.

Now if Rapidscan makes you FEEL safer... well read the quote from Franklin... because you are neither free or safe, truly.

By the way... the most effective airport or facilities security is the one you never see... but I am sure you don't realize this either. It involves a large amount of human intelligence, and humans, as well as some very well trained K-9 noses.

[dysfunctional press]

51. 'not quite' an answer.

in your ben franklin world of not giving up any freedoms in the name of security- what is the maximum level of scrutiny EVERY airline passenger in the u.s. should be put through..?
obviously, any bag/person checks would violate a person's privacy as guaranteed by the 4th amendment- so what CAN be done?

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. The USSC established a limit that is reasonable

and that was the limit established when the metal detectors first went in, as well as baggage checkes.

Rapid scan enters the arena of what I saw as an Emergency Provider... if you do not have a problem by all means, enter the machine.

And once again, what happens when that fails? Body Cavity Searches?

[aikoaiko]

13. Because you are free to not go on a plane, I'm not sure if this is as bad a threat to freedom...

...as you claim.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. I know I don't have to drive either

or for that matter live.

I know...

:eyes:

Perhaps there are reasons that privacy advocates could give you, not that it would matter, that may explain why this is an unreasonable search of your person and papers.

[dysfunctional press]

20. "Perhaps there are reasons..."

There aren't.

it isn't.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. If you are willing to give up freedom for a false sense of security

well you deserve neither and sadly you will get neither.

IN your false sense... well whatever, it is scary to see the same reasoning in a supposedly progressive site that what I read after 9.11 on the AOL right leaning, as in VERY RIGHT leaning message boards.

I guess when scared enough the human animal will react in predictive ways.

Enjoy the fear.

[dysfunctional press]

36. you seem to be the only one expressing/experiencing fear.

:shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. Ye are confusing fear with anger

at the willful surrender of rights for the false sense of security.

[dysfunctional press]

40. actually- that's what you seem to be doing.

you keep saying things like "what's next?"...your biggest fear seems to be of the unknown.

maybe you should learn a little more about the screening procedure and the rapidscan devices before going off half-cocked.

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. I am? Lets just say I do have a little knowledge on

security. The Rapidscan is guaranteed to fail... mark my words.

It is more of the mommy devices we have been using.

Like oh shoes...

So the question of what is next is driven by the incessant over reaction.

Free peoples do not react this way...

[dysfunctional press]

43. "Free peoples do not react this way... "

well then- what would your solution to airport/airline security be?

should 'free people' be able to just walk on a plane without any type of security whatsoever? if not, what level of 'freedom/privacy loss' is acceptable to you?

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. Since you insist on me thiking that security is not necessary

it is. But lets be clear... airport security is a maze of layers. (as well as any other facility security)

By the way BEFORE 9.11 penetrating any sterile area in US Airports was easy... easier than most people believe possible, or easier than in most other countries. SHOCKED?

So here is the things that need to happen....

1.- Background security, the one you never see. That has to reach world standards. It is not. Why you may ask? The cost. There is silly shit done in other places that is not done in the US for the most part... dogs, noses, effective. Funny, we do this for things like oh your sausages coming from Eastern Europe, but not for oh C-4. Surprised?

2.- Sending your shoes down the X-Ray is stupid, since there are explosives out there that will never show up in X-rays. They are military grade by the way. Why doing silly shit like not profiling, but behavior monitoring comes in. El Al is effective at this. Funny, it offered to send people to teach oh JFK how to do this, but we didn't... cost was cited. Now if you do that, and you think A PASSENGER is acting weird, no, not because they are Muslim, but a series of wickets in a behavior profile, you have their shoes checked for a wide spectrum of explosives... you are more likely to catch the next shoe bomber that way than in an X-Ray machine. Granted, sending them shoes down the x-ray might make people feel safer.

3.- How about TSA not leaking confidential documents on the Web? That might help, I was going WTF over.

4.- Yeah do your primary screens, and if you HAVE cause in your behavioral screen to ahem do a secondary check, sure.. perhaps this is where technology comes in, but rely on people... not technology. I know this is the US, we LUVE our toys...

5.- Don't know how much stock to place on some of the stories from Shtipol, but some things that should have triggered a secondary check did not... that is a SYSTEM WIDE HUMAN FAILURE. As they say no amount of technology can correct for stupid. Oh and realize from time to time you will have a break up of the stupid, see what I said about no amount of technology...

By the way nobody has said that the threat is not real, just that the reaction in the US has been mostly about theatrics... and theater does not stop things when police agencies keep info and don't share, when humans expect technology to do what humans should be doing, and when humans are quite clueless about this. Oh and we should try to do silly shit like NOT give reasons for people to ahem join the next revolution... and that is not just the US by the way.

Why when I no longer have a reason to fly, I will definitely avoid it. The wrong kind of the stupid has had a full run, and quite frankly I am not afraid of a random young man, between 20-40 blowing a plane up. Statistically I have better chances of dying on the way to the airport. I am just tired of the theater... I wish I was like most folks... it seems the theatrics makes people FEEL safer.

Oh and Rapidscan is a problem. Mark my worlds, this will end up in front of a court somewhere. Given the nature of the US Court system, especially the USSC, and the passivity of the American people this will be deemed legal, and when it inevitably fails... what's next? Body Cavity Searches?

[jberryhill]

14. How do you justify a metal detector?

I do not agree there is a Fourth Amendment issue here. Nobody is compelled to fly. Whether it is convenient for you to fly rather than take some other means of transportation to Mexico City does not elevate it to a Fourth Amendment issue. You were born with two feet and the right to use them.

But I'd like to know how, in your Fourth Amendment analysis, you distinguish between the scanning technology and a plain old metal detector or x-ray of your luggage?

How did a metal detector and luggage x-ray pass your Fourth Amendment test, but this does not?

For that matter, explain whether you should be able to take a gun with you.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. That is why people with a lot more knowledge on Consitututional

Issues than I have raised the rapidscan as an issue.

Look if it makes you FEEL safer, who am I to raise the issue?

I know that ONCE I no longer have the need to fly, I will maintain a passport, but not fly.

I also know that we are quickly going down a very dangerous rabbit hole. And no, we do not deserve either freedom or security as guaranteed rights, but I'd rather live in a free country and not one with a theater that makes me FEEL safer.

Suffice it to say... this device can and will be defeated too. So what is next? Step into this room so we can get you a body cavity search?

Will that make you feel safer?

[jberryhill]

18. You raised a legal issue, I asked a legal question

How does the rapidscan raise a Fourth Amendment issue that the metal detector and x-ray do not?

If you don't know, then can you ask one of these people who knows more than you to respond?

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. In their time the metal detectors where challenged

Because of the challenges they were not as widely deployed as they would have otherwise.

let me ask you this... seen the Pictures from the rapid scan?

Oh and free clue, it is EASY to defeat too. So a false sense of security it is. And no, I ain't gonna do your homework for ya.

[jberryhill]

26. A search is a search

The quality of the pictures is irrelevant.

So, you are not going to explain the critical Fourth Amendment distinction here are you?

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. YOU CAN DO YOUR HOMEWORK if you are truly interested

I am NOT GOING TO DO IT FOR YOU.

AM I back on the AOL boards? I fear I am... right after 9.11

[jberryhill]

30. Oh, okay... I thought a post entitled "Rapiscan And Your Rights"

Would contain relevant information about, say, Rapiscan and Rights.

But since searches of persons and their luggage are routine at airport checkpoints, I'm mystified by the Constitutional distinction you are trying to make.

[Zywiec]

21. How does the Fourth Amendment apply when I'm being scanned outside the US?

:shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Why perhaps the ACLU is talking of INSIDE the US?

Just an FYI.

Also we are INSISTING that OTHER nations implement this to make us FEEL safer.

You do know all these things can be defeated and there are far more EFFECTIVE things that could be done both INSIDE the US and OUTSIDE that are not being done?

Anyhow, this is something of concern, and yes, it is frightening how fast people are just giving up rights... out of FEAR.

Yep, the Power Elites have found how to control people... the old witches brew... the OTHER and fear.

[jberryhill]

28. It's The Random Capitalization Which Makes Your Position So Compelling...

Ah yes, the "Power Elites" - those OTHERS I should FEAR.

Got it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. It is not my fault Americans have no idea what basic

poli sci terms mean.

As is, they have won by using the ancient means of control, FEAR.

Enjoy the fear.

[jberryhill]

31. "Enjoy the fear"

I wish I could enjoy your fear with you. But I'm sorry that I don't.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. Nah it is YOU who acccepts this as a necesary evil

it is quite a bit of theater, to be honest, and it is quite ridiculous.

Free societies do not react this way. So it is YOU who will have to enjoy the fear.

Me, if I could avoid flying I would, but not because I am afraid of a random Muslim man, with explosives in his underwear, but because it has gotten quite ridiculous to fly, and they keep asking that I keep surrendering my rights. Well, I've had it.

They want to scare people into compliance, by all means. I know it works... so enjoy having your pants scared off. SO when the rapidscan fails and it will... what's next you are willing to let the security state do? A body cavity search?

[shadesofgray]

34. K&R

[undeterred]

42. Rapi scan sounds like rape scan.

[Generator]

45. I guess I don't know why this surprises or upsets you so much

You don't have any rights if you want to fly. It's that simple. It's ALWAYS been that way. Back when the IRA was the real terrorist threat-I had all my belongings searched in London. Ironically when I got to good ole Chicago-they thought I was a drug smuggler. Traveling alone. A woman. Young. You know-very suspicious. Well-they took me to a little room-and a huge beefy woman got to have me undress to check me. Luckily I wasn't suspicious enough for anything more. As I am not sure-but people told me they can do a cavity search. So really why is drugs okay but terrorism not?

And frankly, oh holy p.c. backlash-but I WISH to god they would profile. Oh vey with the grandmas taking off their shoes. American security is a joke. How many airlines have had problems in Israel? Oh yes, zero.

I am just thrilled they changed it so you don't have to wait LONGER than three hours on the tarmac for your plane to take off. Also-you don't have the same rights of free speech on a plane. You can't joke about bombs for instance. You can't even yell or get uppity. You CAN do that on a street corner. It's not the same.

I am much more concerned with big brother-cameras and other privacy matters in the US. If you want to fly you are at the mercy of all the rules.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. Here is a clue

When the PRIVATE companies do this, you are right, you have no rights.

When the government gets involved that silly thing your willing to wipe your ass with comes into play.

If you don't understand this don't be too shocked when these rules you are so willing to accept expand. Oh wait, they are.

[JoeyT]

47. Of course the greatest irony of this

is the people that see absolutely nothing wrong with the government violating everyone's liberties if it makes them think they could be just a little bit safer are usually the very people that see nothing wrong with randomly hurling large quantities of explosives at other countries. After all, only we deserve to be safe. This, kids, is the definition of the word "Cowardice".

Rapidscan? Feh. It isn't like there's much left of the 4th, 5th, or 6th amendments anyway.
As soon as the pearl clutchers manage to figure out how to get half the country to enlist I'm sure they'll do away with the 3rd Amendment too. No one can be a terrorist because you'll have your very own troop quartered in your home!

"How far down the rabbit hole do we go?"
As far as it takes people that think we should live in NerfWorld to feel absolutely safe every single moment of every single day. And not a bit less. At least right up until one of them stubs a toe and we're forced to repeal Posse Comitatus and declare Martial Law.

Edited to add: Want to feel safer at airports? I know I do! Here's how: Use your votes to force your government to stop meddling in other countries. I realize you think they hate us for our freedoms, and are doing your level best to remedy that situation by ensuring we have none, but it's utter nonsense.

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. I wish I could recommend your post

:-)

I might take issue with some of it. But in reality too little of it.

[HipChick]

52. I can't jump on theRapiscan paranoia bandwagon, that's technology we do know about

It's the technology that might be being used that we have no idea about that I'd could whip up a paranoia frenzy about..

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. Rapidscan is a quick fix for a problme that requires

humans.

And crosses limits, but mark my words... if the posts here are any indication, people are willing to go there to feel safe.

[Oldtimeralso]

55. Maybe We Should Take the Train, Amtrak Need Your Support.

Amtrak is a private company owned by the Department of Transportation, as such it receives a Federal Subsidy (like all other passenger services in the world). It can use more business and Capital Monies to buy new equipment.

Maybe I can write a new ad slogan for them;

When you fly, You may die
Use your brain, Take the train!

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. If I could for my destination I would

...

sad, isn't it?

That said, some of this is moving to Amtrak too, mark words