TSA Critic, Senator Rand Paul, Prevented By TSA From Getting On His Flight To DC
from the he-might-be-a-terrorist dept
Senator Rand Paul has frequently criticized the TSA and its security theater at airports both for being intrusive and (more importantly) for not being effective. He's made the point repeatedly that it's a mistake to simply assume everyone may be a terrorist. So it's interesting to note that Paul himself was unable to board his flight to DC today after the TSA refused to let him through security. Apparently the scanner machine spotted something, and Paul refused a pat down. There was some dispute over whether or not he was "detained." The TSA denies "detention," which actually is an important issue, since you cannot detain elected officials on their way to Congress, according to Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution:The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.While the TSA says this wasn't a detention, it does raise questions over whether or not Senator Paul was "questioned in any other Place" while "going to..." his "respective" House. The White House put out a statement that kinda misses the point:
"I think it is absolutely essential that we take the necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe, and I believe that’s what TSA is tasked with doing."Sure, it's essential. But does anyone think that patting down a US Senator has anything to do with ensuring that air travel is safe?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Du-uh
/obv-sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Umm... yeah except I don't think anyone was asking what TSA was tasked with..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's debatable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
But, seriously, how does the average TSA goon know that he is looking at a Senator on his way to Congress? If there is ID or documentation, are they trained to recognize it and validate it? Could it be fake? Could this be a terrorist impersonating a politician?
In a country where nobody knows the politicians:
http://www.people-press.org/2007/04/15/public-knowledge-of-current-affairs-little-chan ged-by-news-and-information-revolutions/
...should we expect the TSA agents to know better?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
Because it's really difficult for TSA employees to uphold the Constitution, it follows that the TSA should be excused from their duty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
As a priority, I'll spend a lot more energy fighting for the general public's rights at TSA than I would ever spend defending a Congressperson's special privilege (Constitutional or not.)
I can pick my battles, this wouldn't be the first one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
> the Constitution, it follows that the TSA should be
> excused from their duty.
That's a good start.
It's also really difficult for the police, military, congress, courts and executive branch to uphold the constitution. They should be excused from constitutional compliance also.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
The purpose of that rule is to ensure that a member's vote/speech can't be silenced by 'accidentally' arresting them.
Of course this only applies to the matter of detention. That doesn't excuse him from any other TSA idiocy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
> goon know that he is looking at a Senator
> on his way to Congress?
All members carry official credentials.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
Not to mention that if terrorist can that convincingly imitate public government officials, we're in far more trouble than what he has in his pockets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Congressmen Should Get Groped As Much As The Rest of Us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Sure, but that's okay. That's why coalitions are so much more effective than compromise. Compromise means nobody involved gets what they want. For the people, compromise usually means symbolic, ineffective legislation that doesn't work.
Coalition means that people can put aside unrelated differences and work together to achieve the things they agree on. It means that all involved can passionately support the results, even when they disagree on other things.
Compromise is a nasty symptom of collectivism, the our-team-against-their-team mentality that dominates our partisan duopoly. Coalition is a positive symptom of individualism, something we value highly as a society. Individualism is what allows people of differing political persuasion, moral codes, race, gender, you-name-it to be fast friends, despite their differences. We see it all the time in everyday life. We rarely see it in politics, except for a few exceptions (Frank, the Pauls, Kucinich, Nader, Wyden, to name a few). If we elected politicians as individuals, completely ignoring their "team," we'd see a lot more cooperation through coalition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I can point you to videos from 30 years ago where he says the same things he says now. :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Read Carefully.
Ron = Father, Presidential Candidate, and Texas Rep
Rand = Son, Senator of Kentucky
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
They like big government just fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"The Tea party types keep pushing abortion and contraception restrictions"
Restrictions on what we feel is murder is not "big government". And nobody is trying to outlaw condoms, although they may object if you want to spend their money to give them to children.
"not to mention limitations on collective bargaining (I guess corporations have freedom of speech, but workers can't freely assemble). "
I like how you think being forced to join a union is related to "freely assemble." They can freely assemble just fine on their own without being forced.
"Not to mention the Keystone pipeline, which means lots of emmanent domain suits depriving random people of their property all along the route"
You know, that sort of thing IS provided for in the Constitution. But we DO object when they do things like take someone's home to give the land to a corporation so they can put up a shopping mall, even if SCOTUS says it's technically constitutional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New Product Idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New Product Idea
You may petition us to get them back, but you are better off waiting until one of low level agents steals them from our evidence storage and sells them on Ebay.
Thank you for your forced cooperation,
TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The question you should be asking is what the Senator was hiding or trying to hide. Clearly, he didn't want a secondary pat down, which would suggest he might have been trying to slide something past the TSA to make a point. He failed, and left. He came back later and took another flight, passing security without problem. It makes me think he got rid of whatever was setting off the alarms.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
No, I am suggest that grand standing politicians aren't beyond trying to sneak something onto a plane in order to try to make a point about the TSA. He should have manned up and taken the pat down like every other citizen would do in that position.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
We have very different definitions of "man up" . . .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I guess it depends on who does the groping. I tried to ask them for the beautiful blond bombshell to give me the grope, but they wanted a smelly old man to do it instead. Gotta draw the line somewhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I disagree about your "manning up and taking the pat down" position like "every other citizen" would. There are plenty of people out there that would take great offense at being a) treated like a criminal and b) groped intrusively by a stranger. Would you want your daughter or grandmother to be violated in that manner for doing nothing wrong? The TSA is out of control, and I find it difficult to understand or respect those who support their efforts. So far they have contributed absolutely nothing to the security of this country.
Personally, I have a problem with the scanners and would opt for the pat down right off the bat. The scanners amount to pornography, and no one is taking nudie pics of me without the proper compensation. The pat down on the other hand is like a free groping, and I would do everything in my power to become aroused and make the situation as awkward as possible for the TSA agent! :0
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I'll say this country is in danger from its elected officials. Not in the form of terrorist activities, but just from sheer incompetance, greed and corruption.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Love the name btw, played WoW a while back with a Nastybutler
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I'm from Indiana... my elected officials have tried to take loaded guns through airport security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Didn't the September 12th 2001 attacks prove that point?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Seems to me the fair thing to do would have been to let him try again. You see it all the time at the courthouse. Someone forgets something and you go oh crap my keys, or whatever, then take them out and try again. Simple. But not when you do things the TSA way.
Which is still fucking stupid because if you got that far you still could blow a whole lotta shit up.
"He came back later and took another flight" - Where did you get that from?
Didnt watch the video did ya?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Paul went beyond a pat-down, baring skin to show the TSA that there was nothing there, and yet they still wanted to touch his naughty bits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: TSA
Perhaps you should do a little research for yourself and not believe the lies the mass media produces. You might be surprised how much you actually support What the Paul's are doing in governement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: TSA
Private business should be allowed to choose who they do business with. If they are real assholes about it, I'll be right there picketing their business along with 99.9% of the population, but that doesn't mean we should write laws that tell people who they have to associate with on their own property.
Turn off Maddow; engage the brain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm the opposite...
I would rather force some TSA agent to put his hands on me every single time I show up at the airport, reminding him that this is what his organization demands of a fellow citizen - than to give them an "out" by going through their invasive (and potentially harmful) machine instead. I want them to know that I have a choice and will exercise it - and I feel better about the choice I'm making.
If everyone had to do the patdowns - rather than be allowed to pass through this invasive "naked scanner" machine, which may or may not ultimately cause cancer someday, then I think the requirements would change pretty quickly.
The conspiracy theorist in me believes that these requirements were very much pushed by the corporations that produce these body scanners and similar invasive technology so that they could unload their technology on the domestic market and rake in the taxpayer-funded-government-subsidies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm the opposite...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm the opposite...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Every year we are losing more and more of our Rights.Soon we will be living in an openly 1984 Police Stare.We sure are getting closer and closer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Big Brother is watching
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Five Members
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We demanded that something be done to keep us safe.
Then it happened. Not that we're anymore safe, mind you.
I think that Paul getting the same treatment as everyone else is a rare example of leveling the playing field.
It is only we who can demand that these procedures change. You want to make that happen. STOP flying. Once you hit the corporati in their pockets, then they will tell the government to change the procedure.
That's how this country works. Lovely, inn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Except that Paul isn't the one you want getting stopped. You want someone who supported this crap to get stopped and have to go through it. THAT'S when things will change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And let's face it, Paul wouldn't think twice about shitting on you if you're not in his class.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How its done in Thailand
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CN0an4lZ9bk
A Thai official shows an airport worker what he thinks of the pat down.
And a side note Thailand actually has terrorist attacks on soil regularly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,
When I am radiated or grouped I do not feel secure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Duh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
let's not forget TSA is part of the executive branch
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: let's not forget TSA is part of the executive branch
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Have you read the damn article?
Now besides that, the TSA is bullshit and shouldnt be allowed to do this in the first place, but I am glad that they didn't give him any special treatment. He was on his way to speak somewhere, but had no official thing to go to (as opposed to going to a Senate vote or something), that makes him just another citizen. They're crappy rules the TSA has, but if you're going to have them, dont give special breaks to people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Have you read the damn article?
Senate Floor Schedule
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Have you read the damn article?
Here's the good bit:
"You know, I was trying to get up here, I had probably the biggest speech of my career, I was going to speak to 200,000 people at the March For Life on the Mall"
I don't care what the schedule says, RAND PAUL himself says he was NOT GOING TO THE SENATE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Have you read the damn article?
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 112th Congress - 2nd Session
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Have you read the damn article?
I like how the Senate begins its "morning" business at the crack of 2 p.m. How do they manage to get themselves out of bed so early?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Have you read the damn article?
As for Senator Paul being treated as if he were "just another citizen", that lacks the legal point of this matter. In this instance, of a sitting US Senator travelling to his "respective House", he is most definitely NOT "another citizen".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Have you read the damn article?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Terrorist Senators
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let the jerks do their business
Who would be at fault? The person going through security with a hard on or the TSA official manipulating a suspicious package?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A turning point?
Not even the White House seem to know what the purpose of TSA is anymore. Perhaps they have started to question if this is the right way to do things? One could hope...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We just don't learn
While its obvious to just about everyone except the TSA that their procedures are moronic, simply stating that on blogs isn't enough. Obama promised change, but there is no way that one man can alter the corruption in Congress. Seems like Google and Facebook should come up with some sort of system that can help to direct our voices, then maybe we can be done with this TSA bullshit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSA Police State
They didn’t find one item in 2011 because of the scanners or groping. Over 90% of items were found using the x-ray belt and walk through metal detectors. They are only groping people to get them to use the scanners and funnel more money to the scanner manufacturers that former TSA head, Michael Chertoff, now represents.
Over 1.3 million Americans have died in defense of the liberties that TSA is trampling. Cowards who defend TSA’s violation of the 4th Amendment in exchange for false security are a pitiful and dishonor the sacrifice of those heroes.
This agency and its workers are a national disgrace and should be replaced with a system that actually works. Thankfully Rand Paul and a few other legislators are trying to preserve our liberties and stop the ascent of the American police state.
TSA Crimes & Abuses
bit.ly/TravelUndergroundTSAabuses
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just another publicity stunt
Do not be fooled by this smooth operator. Like father like son in this case. These guys are both super deep moles who deny their MA$ONIC leadership roles let alone their connections. They are masters of deception, remember Ron P$AUL's inexplicable Bruno "appearance"? Inexplicable to fools alone.
These are as vermin like creatures you will ever know, fools like these are VERY dangerous self-deceivers.
Need anyone be reminded how Rand P$aul advocated attendees, not leaders, but attendees, of so called "anti-american" rallies be jailed & deported ?
These are power hungry fools who will do or say anything.
Please pray for their rapid recovery from their self-deception.
To refresh your memory please watch these videos here: http://goo.gl/tz5Ro
and read more here: http://goo.gl/mhslo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just another publicity stunt
Freemasons were among those who founded the United States. Numerous politicians have been Freemasons. But no Presidents have been Freemasons since Gerald Ford.
There are no "secret agendas" that are revealed at "higher" levels of Freemasonry. I should know, I am a Freemason, was the head of my lodge (called the "Worhipful Master," a reference to being full of worship, and the master of the Lodge), received the 32nd Degree in the Scottish Rite, and am a Shriner. About the most special privledge you could get by joining Freemasonry is to catch a break on a minor traffic ticket from a cop who also happens to be a Mason. That's about it... Oh,... and there's absolutely no devil worship, either. That's propaganda from tin-foil hat types who try to sell you anti-masonic "educational" materials.
The "secrets" of Freemasonryare nothing more than private signs of recognition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Flying is not a right, he should have drove if he didn't want to be searched." Great, except if you drive, the police can stop you at random sobriety checkpoints with no probable cause. Because, you know, driving is not a right. And if you take the bus or the train, you're subject to search, because... Oh well, I guess they should walk. The Senators from Hawaii will be selected by triathalon - whoever can run to the shore, swim the Pacific, and then bike to Washington.
"He was obviously hiding something, which is why he didn't want to be patted down." Which is why he wanted to step through the scanner again, and actually showed them his leg to prove there was nothing there?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you can't trust a U.S. Senator...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A TERRORIST cupcake.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]