- Touring wineries. In Albion. #
I’m sure I will be a first-round pickup for this post, if I’m not already.
A principal from Des Moines, Iowa was denied her constitutional right against “unreasonable search and seizure” by the Transportation Safety Administration. As a general rule, I accept x-ray scans as reasonable. This situation makes me reconsider my stance though.
This woman was returning with some students from a class trip in California when a dulled sandwich knife was noticed in one of her carry-on containers. The TSA confiscated the “weapon” and advised the woman of several “facts”:
- The woman will now be placed on a “terrorist watch list” (probably leading to more illegal acts by our government to spy on her and her contacts)
- She will be fined $500
- Her knife was confiscated
- She had no constitutional rights since she was not arrested
I can’t really protest the list. Lists are universal and everywhere, although it sounds like profiling which is illegal according to case law, I believe. Either way, a list is a list and everyone has one of some type.
The fine seems excessive and wrong. Not only was the incident unintentional, but it was also stopped before she got on the plane. She didn’t carry any weapon onto a plane, it was stopped well before she reached the plane. What was she guilty of, making a mistake? Does she get a trial?
Why was the woman not given a receipt for the knife that was stolen from her by the TSA staff? Are they now allowed to steal from people with no recourse?
Perhaps someone can point out the fault in my logic, but I do not recall anywhere in the United States Constitution where the Constitution is suspended in airports. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution ensures citizens’ right to “be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” The amendment goes on to set forth the conditions under which a warrant may be issued: “no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
It seems to me that this was definitely unreasonable seizure, and the use of x-ray technology in this case makes me think that it is unreasonable search since it removes my being secure in my person, effects, and “papers”. I also think that “papers” could be expanded in today’s world to include laptops, cellular phones, etc.
Am I off my rocker on this? Yes, Dave, I know you’ll have a large rebuttal.
I am writing this primarily in response to the recent letter from Jerry Merritt regarding smoking and the upcoming ban by the communist state of Illinois.
To begin, Merritt does an excellent job of using imagery to paint smokers as horrible people akin to “factory boilers, pacifier users, and druggies”. Also, being dressed well and going out after church has nothing to do with the smoking law, but it is more good creative writing. Kudos for creative writing.
Now, to address a few incorrect points made in that letter:
Non-smokers have no “right” to be guaranteed a non-smoking environment. I checked, it was nowhere in the Illinois nor United States constitutions.
Everyone does have the choice not to go into a business that allows smoking. If the business loses enough money by allowing smoking (for example, the non-smokers), they will disallow it. Apparently that is not the case.
Children fall into the same position. They have their decisions made for them (in theory) by their responsible parents or guardians. I agree they shouldn’t be around smoking, but they are their parents responsibility. The parents shouldn’t put them in that situation.
Similarly, smokers have no “right” to smoke at any given location. I like some local restaurants that don’t allow smoking. I don’t whine and cry about it. When we’re done eating and chatting, I just go outside and have a smoke. No big deal.
However, there are some times where I want to munch and have a smoke like at a sports bar. Obviously the business understands that its patrons like to have a smoke (pipe, cigar, etc.) and allows it. Some others don’t allow smoking, and I wouldn’t go there on those occasions.
The bottom line is that there is no right to smoke or not smoke. Everyone has a choice to smoke or not smoke and the right to support any business either way the owner decides to run their business.
This law is simply another way for the government to intrude on our personal lives and business decisions. If the state would just declare communism, they could control things like they want in our private lives and we couldn’t stop them. Oh wait…
“Nope, no smoking in bars! And pretty soon, no drinking and no talking!” – Eddie Izzard
Yay! I finally got the last CPVC elbow I needed and squeezed under the cabinet to get the faucet glued into place. Now comes the 2 hour wait to see if it is watertight. About 1PM Central I get to turn the water back on and run to make sure there isn’t water spraying everywhere.
It will be nice to actually accomplish something instead of scouring the internet and classifieds looking for employment. I’m even kicking around the idea of taking out a small ad and doing freelance PC work. The only thing holding me back is the fact that once you work on a PC, the owner will expect you to come fix EVERYTHING that ever goes wrong for free.
When you call a plumber to fix your toilet, does he come back to fix the sink for free? Nope. Same for computer repair. How about when a mechanic changes your oil, does he then have to fix your transmission in a month when it goes out? Nope. Same for computer repair.
Moving on though… …I think I’ll replace the shower in the master bath next. It should just be a matter of replacing the shower lever and the surrounding enclosure. I hope.
After Emily wakes up, I’ll look at it closer. May as well get home repairs/projects out of the way while I have the time.
UPDATE: The pipes are not leaking. Go me.
