(no subject)
Nov. 19th, 2010 22:14http://fl250.blogspot.com/2010/11/security-silliness.html
Why have airports become rights-free zones? Because aviation has been targeted by terrorists? Trains and subways have been extensively targeted worldwide, should search and seizure without probable cause be allowed on them as well? New York City itself has been repeatedly targeted by terrorists more than any other city in America; should the Bill of Rights no longer apply on the island of Manhattan?
The standard worn-out answer is, "If you don't like it, you don't have to fly." That's a horrible excuse that can be expanded to cover nearly every trammeling of God-given rights. You don't have to travel by train or subway, or visit or live in New York City, do you? You don't have to use the sidewalk by your house, do you? In that case, should using these purely optional pieces of public property be probable cause for a police officer to detain and strip search you? I'm not saying we shouldn't have security at airports, nor that every right should apply (the 2nd ammd clearly does not, for example). The courts have clearly held that security checks at airports, as previously conducted, are constitutional administrative searches. That said, unelected officials have made a very large leap from minimally invasive passive technologies such as magnetometers and explosive trace sniffers to highly invasive technologies and techniques without a sniff of public debate on the constitutional implications and the poor precedents that might be set.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-11 11:00 (UTC)ну когда же!
no subject
Date: 2010-12-11 19:34 (UTC)Вот привыкнут к общупыванию — и через годик можно будет подумать о ректальном, вагинальном и желудочном осмотрах.
Не торопитесь.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-11 19:43 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-12-11 19:50 (UTC)