DHS is allowed to take a traveler's laptop for an unspecified period of time without suspicion of actual wrongdoing

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Matt, without probable cause, a police officer, for example, cannot search your car after pulling you over, even if you were speeding. In order for that police officer to legally search your car without your permission, he would have to obtain a search warrant from a judge and that judge would decide if there is probable cause.

It doesn't require someone to be a security expert to see this as a violation of constitutional right to privacy. Hopefully, this will be challenged in the courts and declared unconstitutional. I don't want to live in a country where everyone of us is a potential terrorist suspect. Jurisprudence is what we all have a right to expect with regard to the laws and our Constitution.

Steven, I'm sorry to say that you are absolutely incorrect.

While police officers do need search warrants to enter homes without the owner's permission, the same is not true for vehicles. If a police officer feels he or she needs to search the car, they may do so with or without the owner's permission and do not require a search warrant.

Actually, I forgot to add the clause....unless the police officer has reasonable suspicion.

(see below)

Just Say "No" to Warrantless Searches

Warning: If a police officer asks your permission to search, you are under no obligation to consent. The only reason he's asking you is because he doesn't have enough evidence to search without your consent. If you consent to a search request you give up one of the most important constitutional rights you have—your Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. A majority of avoidable police searches occur because citizens naively waive their Fourth Amendment rights by consenting to warrantless searches. As a general rule, if a person consents to a warrantless search, the search automatically becomes reasonable and therefore legal. Consequently, whatever an officer finds during such a search can be used to convict the person.

Don't expect a police officer to tell you about your right not to consent. Police officers are not required by law to inform you of your rights before asking you to consent to a search. In addition, police officers are trained to use their authority to get people to consent to a search, and most people are predisposed to comply with any request a police officer makes. For example, the average motorist stopped by a police officer who asks them, "Would you mind if I search your vehicle, please?" will probably consent to the officer's search without realizing that they have every right to deny the officer's request.

If, for any reason you don't want the officer digging through your belongings, you should refuse to consent by saying something like, "Officer, I know you want to do your job, but I do not consent to any searches of my private property." If the officer still proceeds to search you and finds illegal contraband, your attorney can argue that the contraband was discovered through an illegal search and hence should be thrown out of court.

You should never hesitate to assert your constitutional rights. Just say "no!"

http://www.flexyourrights.org/traffic_stop_scenario

[S and S 12]

"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither."

-Benjamin Franklin

Benjamin Franklin lived in a time where the enemy wore a uniform, and fought in a line formation against our uniformed combatants.

Fast forward to the 21st century.

Are the extra security measures employed today to protect America really diminishing the essential liberties that Franklin spoke of?

I take it you have no problem if you are in an airport and you are held up for 8 or 9 hours in airport security for no reason and your laptop is taken and even once you are released they never tell you why they detained you in the first place. This actually happens frequently. One time there was even a female soldier on military orders to travel that was informed she had been put on the "no fly list". I never heard if she got off of it and they had no good reason to put her on it.

Do you really believe these things do not infringe on civil liberties at all?

We really have no grounds to question the performance of DHS, do we? I think they have a very difficult and stressful job. How would you like to be in charge of making sure people who wish to do this country harm are not admitted?

If everyone got an answer to why they were being detained, one could easily come up with a list of things they look for. This is why I don't think they release that information, because it could compromise security, not because they are trying to be A-holes to people, sheesh.

You don't have to like these policies to see that they are necessary.

Would you prefer we fire all DHS employees, and give out free RPG launchers at POEs? Oh wait, you said you wanted "some" security. "Some" equaling "lax", I assume. Then when some other yahoo decides to hijack a plane or something, we can point the finger at DHS for being too lax!

Everyone's a National Security expert nowadays.... sigh

You don't know me or what I do for a living so don't tell me what decisions I've had to make. You obviously remain ignorant to history and have a deep lack of respect for what the founders of this country were trying to do. It is obvious you have no problem with America becoming a police state. On your line of thinking, we should bann guns altogether and be like Brittain who has far less murder with guns. Its a huge part of the constitution, but like you said, in the name of security and safety it is necessary.

Another things you didn't think of is most people detained like that are not white. Which obviously you are white. You will never experience the humilitation DHS puts some people through. The thing is most people can deal with themselves going through it. Why don't you ask yourself how you would feel if it was your sister, mother, or granma going through body searches, being handcuffed in front of everyone in the airport and being subjected to 8 or 9 hour interogations possibly without food or water. Then they can have their things confiscated from them and never be told why or possibly not get some of their stuff back. You really think this is okay? You think this resembles what our country was meant to be? Read the horror stories people have faced going through airports, Matt. DHS might have a difficult job, but while they are searching a certain race, has it ever occured to you how easy it is as a white person to sneak things through? I'm white myself, I know. So if a drug smuggler or terrorist group wanted to get their things on the plane, they aren't going to use someone who looks middle eastern anymore, no, they know we search all of them. They will use someone who appears to be white with a white name. Why, no one subjects most people to those horrific searches. Then you know what? You bombs your so afraid of will get through, not to mention all the drugs they must take through as well. Don't act like you know anything about security. Don't feel sorry for people who get paid well to do their jobs. Some of them are good, but some are abusing their powers and there is no one to stop them.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither."

-Benjamin Franklin

Benjamin Franklin lived in a time where the enemy wore a uniform, and fought in a line formation against our uniformed combatants.

Fast forward to the 21st century.

Are the extra security measures employed today to protect America really diminishing the essential liberties that Franklin spoke of?

I take it you have no problem if you are in an airport and you are held up for 8 or 9 hours in airport security for no reason and your laptop is taken and even once you are released they never tell you why they detained you in the first place. This actually happens frequently. One time there was even a female soldier on military orders to travel that was informed she had been put on the "no fly list". I never heard if she got off of it and they had no good reason to put her on it.

Do you really believe these things do not infringe on civil liberties at all?

We really have no grounds to question the performance of DHS, do we? I think they have a very difficult and stressful job. How would you like to be in charge of making sure people who wish to do this country harm are not admitted?

If everyone got an answer to why they were being detained, one could easily come up with a list of things they look for. This is why I don't think they release that information, because it could compromise security, not because they are trying to be A-holes to people, sheesh.

You don't have to like these policies to see that they are necessary.

Would you prefer we fire all DHS employees, and give out free RPG launchers at POEs? Oh wait, you said you wanted "some" security. "Some" equaling "lax", I assume. Then when some other yahoo decides to hijack a plane or something, we can point the finger at DHS for being too lax!

Everyone's a National Security expert nowadays.... sigh

You don't know me or what I do for a living so don't tell me what decisions I've had to make. You obviously remain ignorant to history and have a deep lack of respect for what the founders of this country were trying to do. It is obvious you have no problem with America becoming a police state. On your line of thinking, we should bann guns altogether and be like Brittain who has far less murder with guns. Its a huge part of the constitution, but like you said, in the name of security and safety it is necessary.

Excellent comparison.

[IAMX 3,055]

Are the extra security measures employed today to protect America really diminishing the essential liberties that Franklin spoke of?

Yes, they sure as hell are. Don't tread on me, a-holes. I'm not the terrorist. Taking away my civil liberties, eavesdropping on my conversations in the name of terrorism, taking away my rights in the name of terrorism.. means I'm a terrorist and so is a shitload of other Americans. When you realize your government is treating you like a terrorist, in the name of fighting terrorism, you'll begin to understand it's the most retarded thing ever to sacrifice liberty for protection/safety. There's NEVER a guarantee of safety. The only thing you have guaranteed is you have less rights.

Edited August 3, 2008 by SRVT

[mRx 16]

"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither."

-Benjamin Franklin

Benjamin Franklin lived in a time where the enemy wore a uniform, and fought in a line formation against our uniformed combatants.

Fast forward to the 21st century.

Are the extra security measures employed today to protect America really diminishing the essential liberties that Franklin spoke of?

I take it you have no problem if you are in an airport and you are held up for 8 or 9 hours in airport security for no reason and your laptop is taken and even once you are released they never tell you why they detained you in the first place. This actually happens frequently. One time there was even a female soldier on military orders to travel that was informed she had been put on the "no fly list". I never heard if she got off of it and they had no good reason to put her on it.

Do you really believe these things do not infringe on civil liberties at all?

We really have no grounds to question the performance of DHS, do we? I think they have a very difficult and stressful job. How would you like to be in charge of making sure people who wish to do this country harm are not admitted?

If everyone got an answer to why they were being detained, one could easily come up with a list of things they look for. This is why I don't think they release that information, because it could compromise security, not because they are trying to be A-holes to people, sheesh.

You don't have to like these policies to see that they are necessary.

Would you prefer we fire all DHS employees, and give out free RPG launchers at POEs? Oh wait, you said you wanted "some" security. "Some" equaling "lax", I assume. Then when some other yahoo decides to hijack a plane or something, we can point the finger at DHS for being too lax!

Everyone's a National Security expert nowadays.... sigh

You don't know me or what I do for a living so don't tell me what decisions I've had to make. You obviously remain ignorant to history and have a deep lack of respect for what the founders of this country were trying to do. It is obvious you have no problem with America becoming a police state. On your line of thinking, we should bann guns altogether and be like Brittain who has far less murder with guns. Its a huge part of the constitution, but like you said, in the name of security and safety it is necessary.

Another things you didn't think of is most people detained like that are not white. Which obviously you are white. You will never experience the humilitation DHS puts some people through. The thing is most people can deal with themselves going through it. Why don't you ask yourself how you would feel if it was your sister, mother, or granma going through body searches, being handcuffed in front of everyone in the airport and being subjected to 8 or 9 hour interogations possibly without food or water. Then they can have their things confiscated from them and never be told why or possibly not get some of their stuff back. You really think this is okay? You think this resembles what our country was meant to be? Read the horror stories people have faced going through airports, Matt. DHS might have a difficult job, but while they are searching a certain race, has it ever occured to you how easy it is as a white person to sneak things through? I'm white myself, I know. So if a drug smuggler or terrorist group wanted to get their things on the plane, they aren't going to use someone who looks middle eastern anymore, no, they know we search all of them. They will use someone who appears to be white with a white name. Why, no one subjects most people to those horrific searches. Then you know what? You bombs your so afraid of will get through, not to mention all the drugs they must take through as well. Don't act like you know anything about security. Don't feel sorry for people who get paid well to do their jobs. Some of them are good, but some are abusing their powers and there is no one to stop them.

Oh damn it. Where do I start with you?

First off, your whole gigantic second paragraph is absolute garbage. Most people detained are not white? ***Excuse me, while I go call the SECDEF and tell him that the KKK is secretly the TSA.... *** Baseless assumption. Show me facts, or kindly GTFO. Sorry but I learned my lesson with all that. I've went through TSA in uniform, and was still subjected to the same screening as anyone else. And OMG, I'm a whitey too! So don't gimme that line of BS. However, show me a racial profiling trend and documented hatred for non-whites, that is standard among DHS SOP, and I will digress. But face it, your venting...

You can sympathize all you want for middle eastern people. That is your right. But come on, TSA checks everyone. No bombs are coming through the x-ray due to racial favors. Mules go through the X-ray too, ya know. So, sorry to spoil your racial profiling crusade. Let's be realistic.

On your line of thinking, we should bann guns altogether and be like Brittain who has far less murder with guns.

Couldn't be further from my "line of thinking".

Steven, I agree completely with what you're saying. I truly respect your input on VJ.

But is it impossible to respect the reasonable objectiveness that the TSA/DHS rely on to conduct their job?

[Niels Bohr 72]

This isn't about race. DHS wants a reason to use so that they are not liable for the search and seisures. And, this policy is another way to increase DHS power of authority on travelers like "No questions asked, listen and follow only"