The TSA Can't Even Defend Their Water Fountain Against Me
As I've said in the past, the repurposed mall food court workers of the TSA couldn't find a terrorist if he crawled up their ass and yodeled.
I -- somehow -- was randomly given Pre Check for both legs of my flight to the Arkansas Literary Festival.
I got a taste of how travel used to be -- back before we were all made to take off our shoes, get in a prison stance to get groped, and have our belongings pawed by cop-costumed, dead-eyed government workers.
I went through the metal detector -- with my boots on -- didn't make it buzz, and I went on my way. No removing all my belongings. No having some gropenfrau check my labia for explosives.
Meanwhile, there's no probable cause for these searches they are doing. No reasonable suspicion some traveler is plotting something criminal. No, the TSA workers are told to suspect and search (for no good fucking reason at all) the business dude lugging widgets, every little boy with autism, every tired mom taking the kids to visit grandma.
And best of all, if you want to take your loaded gun on the plane, there's a pretty damn good chance they'll never spot it. (Not that we should care that people take loaded guns on planes -- and besides, somebody could garrote you with dental floss.)
I tried to change things by protesting the violation of our Fourth Amendment rights with some civil disobedience at LAX.
It was followed by First Amendment ninja Marc Randazza's generous pro bono defense of me (see link above) -- making the TSA worker and her slimy lawyer crawl back into their holes instead of following through with the promised lawsuit to squeeze me for $500K, a blog takedown, and a written apology.
Um, nuh-uh. Or as I told Randazza when we started the process: "I'd rather chew glass."
A few others stood up, too, in protest of the TSA. Like wonderful Jonathan Corbett. For the most part, though, nobody really cared or did anything to join us in protesting.
As I (and many others) have pointed out, what we have now is the mere pretense of security. What I believe it ultimately is: Obedience-training for the American public so we'll be docile as our rights are yanked from us.
Thanks, sheeple!
Well, underscoring my contention that, for the most part, TSA workers are largely clueless drones incapable of stopping any activity that lies outside of their immediate job, I spotted a sign at the airport and decided to have some "fuck you!" fun with the TSA.
A uniformed TSA worker was getting a drink from this drinking fountain. I waited for him to finish. As I crouched down to fill an empty water bottle I'd, he muttered something like, "You can't..." and then he turned tail.
I ultimately filled four water bottles with nice cold water to drink on my two flight legs -- nice cold water paid for by we idiot taxpayers who elect the idiot sellout legislators who keep the TSA going.
My only regret was that there was nobody around I could get to take my picture while I filled the bottles.
TSA: Don't expect them to catch more than, oh, a tennis ball.
The only way they catch a tennis ball is if they have a K-9 stationed at the check point.
I R A Darth Aggie at May 1, 2018 7:07 AM
Semi-surprised it wasn't alcoholic, maybe on Fridays.
Joe j at May 1, 2018 8:20 AM
Gropenfrau
I love this coinage, Amy.
Kevin at May 1, 2018 1:30 PM
Again with the derogatory comparison to mall food court workers. Obviously you think they are stupid enough to qualify to work for TSA. Do you not get how insulting that is??
Stormy at May 1, 2018 1:34 PM
If Mom fails her exam to receive my kidney, it will be upsetting, of course, but it does mean I will have a kidney available for that friend of yours, Amy, if he's still on dialysis and I pass medical tests of course.
So, given that the TSA is still in full swing, does one of your LA friends have a private plane I could use to get over there, should things happen in that direction?
mpetrie98 at May 1, 2018 3:56 PM
So, because you have contempt for the TSA, that entitles you to help yourself to a watercooler that is clearly marked for them?
That doesn't sound terribly ethical, Amy. Contempt for someone does not give you the right to steal from them.
Patrick at May 1, 2018 5:22 PM
Contempt no, the fact that they are constitution shredding child molesting thieves, yes
lujlp at May 1, 2018 7:14 PM
And what happens when that pair of eyes that might have caught the bomb-carrying passenger is looking away, busy refilling a water cooler that emptied prematurely because an entitled passenger decided to bully some TSA agents?
Of course, that question is based on an assumption that an agency with a spectacular failure rate at doing its stated job would magically have become competent in the time you spent filling "four water bottles."
That seems like the bullying behavior you're always decrying.
This might not have been the wisest course of action for you. Had you been arrested for this, a judge would not have seen a woman with a valid grudge against a TSA Gropenfrau (nice description, by the way), but an entitled brat spoiling for a fight with a federal agency. Not exactly a Cliven Bundy level revolt over water rights.
Conan the Grammarian at May 1, 2018 7:49 PM
lujlp: Contempt no, the fact that they are constitution shredding
No, they aren't.
You may not like what they do, but they are within their constitutional rights to do so.
Patrick at May 1, 2018 7:54 PM
"You may not like what they do, but they are within their constitutional rights to do so."
Okay, time for the question I couldn't get Mike Hunter to answer when he defended these... people:
What mode of travel is your right?
There are a lot of people willing to say that the Constitution means what the courts say it does - and most of them thinks the Constitution grants them something.
Do tell!
Radwaste at May 1, 2018 8:06 PM
What rights does the Constitution grant government agencies?
It’s mostly about restricting government from trampling your rights, rights you have outside of government fiat.
Conan the Grammarian at May 1, 2018 8:54 PM
Radwaste: What mode of travel is your right?
I've already answered this question. Perhaps this time you'll pay attention.
Ready?
By human and animal means. Those are your modes of travel that you have the right to use.
Your question is now answered.
Patrick at May 2, 2018 2:58 AM
"Your question is now answered."
You think so, eh?
You really think you can't be patted down for walking where some officer thinks you shouldn't be? You really think you have a right to walk or ride an animal without being searched?
Good thing you're cute, huh?
(You've also set a precedent for determining that you have no right to free speech other than by speaking. Good job.)
Radwaste at May 2, 2018 3:48 PM
Ordinarily, I would find it absolutely fascinating to figure out how you arrived at the conclusion that I "had set a precedent for" anything regarding free speech, based on what the courts have said regarding our right to travel.
But the point is, you arrive at so many weird conclusions, such as "children have no rights as enumerated by the Constitution," despite the fact that Tinker v. Des Moines plainly referred to the children's rights to free speech, to say nothing of the fact that underage litigants were seeking a redress of grievance in court, which makes two constitutional rights right there.
But whatever interest I have in exploring your whackadoodle reasons for arriving at the conclusion you did regarding free speech (to say nothing of the fact that you seem to think I can set a legal precedent for anything) is overcome by the trepidation I have in descending into the rabbit hole of your thought process.
So, however you arrived at your idiocy, I don't want to know. Enjoy your weird, bizarro world. And remember, the nice men in the white coats are your friends. They only want to help you.
Patrick at May 2, 2018 4:26 PM
I find it fascinating that the advocate for personal liberty is the insane one in Patrick's world.
Apparently, Patrick, you've forgotten this.
Enjoy submission much? Of course you do.
Radwaste at May 4, 2018 2:15 AM
None. You have a right to move about freely, but if you're using public or even private means, you're subject to the rules and restrictions of the network and the carrier therein, even the stupid ones. That the government runs the TSA and requires airlines to conform to its rules is the argument here, not that airlines have a right to restrict what you carry on their planes.
And what about the rights of the people below the planes, in the cities and farms? Do they have a collective say in who is allowed to use their airspace and with what restrictions?
You have a right to travel freely, not free. You do not have a right to be granted passage with no restrictions or costs.
Just like healthcare, if you assume the right to something that is private, you obligate another person to provide to you the fruits of their labor at no cost to you. That's not how it works; that's not what a right is.
Conan the Grammarian at May 4, 2018 10:16 AM
Leave a comment