| Author |
Topic:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down [Locked] |
Moe_Nox  Title: In Moe We Trust
Posts: 1,962
Registered: 2007-2-4 12:17:56
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
ZigmundZag posted:
Damn, I'm not sure which side to root for here. 
Definitely on Rand Paul's side. We need security but the TSA standard has moved to a ridiculous point.
-----signature-----
The Nanny State cometh
Currency should be bacon cheeseburgers and blow jobs... - Reese
Life at the Outpost: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1771556
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
Brother_Tempus posted:
Altra_Shadowstalker posted:
Thank you BT, my post is much more accurate now that there is a bunch of typos in it.
That's very true, your contract is "nothing more" than the agreement you have with the airliner. That agreement involves going through their security checkpoints.
If it were their security checkpoints, then they would be operated by their employees not government thugs
You come into my house, I ask you to leave, you don't. I call the cops.
Your idiotic, elitist views on government police force aside, this is how it should work, right?
I have a party, I hire a security to deal with keeping unwanted people out. Someone doesn't have a ticket but tries to get in repeatedly. My security detains him and calls the police.
Y/N?
I have a giant party. Steve Tyler is frontlining. I notify the city who sends over a police presence to assist my security force. I pay the city for this service (a la the two stadiums I've worked at).
Y/N?
I have a giant annual party. Last year I said I didn't want no pigs. Three people died when my security service failed to detect weapons at the door or intervene in easily stoppable or preventable situations. My parties are thrown on government land. The city tells me they'll issue a permit to me only if a police presence assists the security there and determines proper procedures are followed.
Y/N? Why not?
-----signature-----
"Goddammit, Swearengen, I don't trust you as far as I could th'ow you, but I enjoy the way you lie."
I don't typo often, but when I do, I blame Swype.
|
Kjarhall  Title: The Pungent One
Posts: 915
Registered: 2002-3-1 15:47:21
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
I knew the longer this thread went on, some kind of  would come out.
-----signature-----
You're a crazy moron*
*http://vnboards.ign.com/outpost/b22180/115147923/r115151508/
hah! true story tho i'm a woman an i even love boobs..how can you not??- HallowEve
|
GrilledCheez Title: The Lord's Balls
Posts: 1,060
Registered: 2006-3-22 11:06:32
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
State agencies creep. That's just what they do. You let them regulate sidewalks, soon they're regulating front lawns. Our government should be more about limiting its power than expressing it. i'm for whoever agrees with that, because it's right.
-----signature-----
Another word for expensive is successful.
|
NuEM Posts: 1,007
Registered: 2004-3-2 09:08:11
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
Could someone open their own private major airport without TSA and all that makes-you-feel-safe-but-actually-is-only-annoying crap?
-----signature-----
|
Tych2 Title: Obama Appointed Outpost Czar
Posts: 2,511
Registered: 2005-3-1 06:56:47
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
They would have to abide by FAA regs, so no.
-----signature-----
We have enough youth. What we need is a fountain of smart.
Drill Anwar!
Kapie
Drevid in Tanks
|
imaloon1 Posts: 674
Registered: 2003-9-15 07:19:53
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
Private Charter planes don't have to go through TSA checkpoints....
-----signature-----
The time draws nearer to your fate
|
Tipztoe Posts: 1,775
Registered: 2004-3-1 17:53:43
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
|
you guys are missing the point.
If airlines want to require security to pat you down, that is up to them. Government has no business doing it, or adding another bloated government agency that taxpayers have to front the bill for, especially when they don't even use it.
You may or may not have a right to fly, but you certainly shouldn't be using tax dollars to decide.
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
The airliners are good for the economy. If the choice is that we pay extra for their security or they should be shut down because their failure to protect their passengers and their equipment from being directly involved in the greatest terrorist attack this country has ever seen, resulting in 5,000 dead, two major skyscrapers brought down, the economy tanking, the government launching two wars which cost trillions in dollars and thousands of American lives... I vote we just beef up the security. The taxes they pay when they're not too busy going bankrupt probably makes up for it.
-----signature-----
"Goddammit, Swearengen, I don't trust you as far as I could th'ow you, but I enjoy the way you lie."
I don't typo often, but when I do, I blame Swype.
|
ZigmundZag Title: Grammar Nazi
Posts: 1,211
Registered: 2002-3-25 23:03:00
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:01am
Subject:
TSA detains Rand Paul after he refuses pat down |
Tipztoe posted:
you guys are missing the point.
If airlines want to require security to pat you down, that is up to them. Government has no business doing it, or adding another bloated government agency that taxpayers have to front the bill for, especially when they don't even use it.
You may or may not have a right to fly, but you certainly shouldn't be using tax dollars to decide.
Yeah, we tried it that way for awhile. Until around 2001 or so, I think.
-----signature-----
"Take the cheese to sickbay!"
|
|
