Texas House Bans Offensive Security Pat-Downs
 

Texas lawmakers with little opposition passed a law that makes it illegal for anyone conducting searches to touch “the anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast of another person” including through clothing. Also, it forbids searches that would "be offensive to a reasonable person". (I'm gathering they don't mean Janet Napolitano)

Will it be challenged as being superseded by Federal Law? If Texas state law is challenged, will it then go to the Supreme Court? Can the Federal government count on the Supremes to support it's contention of the loss of 4th Amendment rights, and rights to personal privacy at the nation's airports?

Now that Texas has broken the ice, I expect we'll see more of this sort of law. The Federal Government is officially on notice.

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/05/13/t...ity-pat-downs/

I think the FAA should ban all flights into and out of Texas until the issue has been settled. Hell, they aren't safe and isn't safety the whole purpose. I know, Richie, the whole thing (in your opinion) is a facade. My junk is ready for inspection if it'll keep us all safe. If yours isn't, you have a choice.

Xavier

You were so worried that we let terrorists in on secrets so now we tell them where they can safely hide their explosives. Can't have it both ways buddy. Or should we just search people who might look as though they are Muslim?

Warped Humor Alert
 

Gives a whole new meaning to the song, "Searching for love in all the wrong places". :throwtomatoes:

Man, Richie talked as if it were a done deal. I'm sorry, I see it only passed in one house. See I got all excited over something that will probably not happen. It won't go anywhere, just like in New Hampshire. ... and if it does, it'll get shot down somewhere else. If I'm wrong, see my previous post on this thread.

Xavier

:sigh:

How does inspecting "your junk" keep us safe?

I didn't ask Texas to write this law; I didn't write the law, I didn't vote on this law and I didn't write the article reporting the passage of this law, and I clearly wrote in the header what the subject matter was about.

I know you don't like to be reminded of this issue and I clearly labeled it.

It doesn't have to pass another House. This is the State Legislature, not The Federal Legislature.

But the state legislature still has a House and Senate.

This link is a little educational piece that explains how a bill becomes a law in Texas. See all the GOOD stuff you can find on the Internet.

http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/gtli/legproc/process.html

Xavier

The CBS News article said the law may be superseded by Federal Law. It says nothing about going through further steps to become final law.

CBS is not reporting the story with much credence from what you're telling me. I always say "I don't believe the liberal media"; and here I am repeating something they reported. Serves me right if you are right.

The very first sentence in the article you provided a link for http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/05/13/t...ty-pat-downs/:

"AUSTIN (AP) - The Texas House passed a bill that would make it a criminal offense for public servants to inappropriately touch travelers during airport security pat-downs."

...clearly states that a BILL was passed on. It did not state that a bill was signed into law. ;)

Xavier

I've said it befor and I'll say it again - and I agree with Richie on this one.

The TSA is a FARCE. None of the security measures would have prevented either the shoe or underwear bombers. The TSA has, to date, still caught NO terrorists while passengers on airplanes have caught 2 with incendiaries,

That's right. Untrained passengers outscoring the pathetic TSA. I was in favor of the TSA until they bowed to union demands to drop a requirement that employees be high-school graduates. Think about that.

Time and time again, sting operations show that the TSA is like a sieve when it comes to keeping weapons off airplanes.

These enhanced scanners turn out to be manufactured by a company that the TSA head has ties to. The "sniffer" technology (where a quick burst of air is blown at you and the machine 'sniffs' for explosives residue) was NOT chosen, yet that WOULD have identified the two bombers that the passengers caught.

Being against the TSA is not being against safety. The TSA does not provide safety. They provide Security Theater at an ever increasing expense.

My previous post about how the TSA gets away with things that a police officer can not et away with is further proof of an out of control agency that answers to nobody with no review or assessment of their value.

...and I have a 'choice'? Explain to me what my choice is for getting overseas.

Twisting, twisting, twisting the night away.

It really is creepy how obsessed you still are with me Lou, errrr Xavier.

Oh I think Lou is here, but I'm not him. The Administrators can tell by IP addresses and I'm sure, other means as well. Back a long time ago they saw that my wife and I were using the same IP address and investigated. Political finally drove her away from TOTV completely. I really appreciated that the Administrators (Tony and Talk Host) were keeping an eye on things. They do a good job.

Richie, look at it this way, today hasn't been a complete waste of time for you. Today you learned the difference between a bill and a law and you learned that I'm not Lou. Lou had lots of good qualities. I'd take him for a neighbor any day of the week. He let a bully or two or three get to him. You've got to know what you are dealing with and then it's easy to adapt. :wave: Peace brother.

Xavier

Hi Richie,
That's not what I was trying to tell you. My point was that the CBS report to which you linked states that the Texas House passed the bill. If the Texas Senate had also already passed the bill, then the CBS report would have stated that the Texas Legislature passed the bill.

Your statement that the article "says nothing about going through further steps to become final law," is incorrect. Since the article says it only passed the Texas House, then based on the CBS article, it would still have to go through the Texas Senate and be signed by the Texas governor before it could become a law.

I didn't post this to pick on you, but to clarify a factual mistake. I would much rather that an error I make be corrected than to have other people rely on my mistaken information-- and for me to continue to be mistaken.

Thanks P. I wasn't ticked that you sent me the information. I guess I did misinterpret the news article. But, why did the article then go straight to pointing out the possible federal laws that would be affected. It's still a poorly written article, in my opinion.

All in all, I'm still glad the Texas House passed this and there's a good chance this bill will proceed anyway. I expect this won't be the last state to do this.

Still very creepy the way you obsess over me.

Xavier, I'll support your idea if your support mine - Texas should ban all exports of natural gas. This is within the rights of the state. No natural gas going out of Texas would increase the safety of the nation from natural gas explosions. It's time to realize that the Constitution does not make the Presidency a Monarchy.

Actually, if Texas could afford to disallow it's natural gas to leave the state, I could live with that. In fact I'm sure that would probably benefit me and a very large portion of the United States nicely. If you are not familiar with Marcellus Shale and the Natural Gas being pulled out of the ground in northeast as we speak here is a link that tells you a little bit about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcellus_Formation

I happen to control a goodly portion of land in that area. So you see, I can support your idea and would guess that you will now support my idea.

I'm not really sure of where your last sentence comes in:

"It's time to realize that the Constitution does not make the Presidency a Monarchy."

Maybe you can explain the relevancy.

Xavier

I obsess on the truth. You just happen to be the biggest offender and fabricator - otherwise I certainly wouldn't waste my time. Actually, I know it's still of waste of time because everyone has your number. The other misguided souls don't really count because they are in their own little lock-step issues. There are only one or two of them anyway. This is a thinking persons' world. Relics will eventually fade into oblivion. :wave::wave::wave:

Xavier

Now you ARE just a bald faced liar. Fabricator? I dare you to show ONE example of me fabricating anything. When you don't agree with me that doesn't make it a lie, which is what fabricator means in case you're too ignorant to know. I've never lied in this forum, ever and I challenge you to dispute that.

Put up or shut up. One lie I've posted, just one. If not, have the courage to apologize for your insult.

Lock step issues? You're describing yourself. Lock step Progressive Democrat defender of the Democrat agenda come hell or high water. Your throw a lot of rocks for someone living in a glass house.

I dislike getting in a personal discussion with someone who seems as childish as you, but you leave me little option. Your constant obsessive personal attacks on me are getting wearisome.

I know you can't stick to the issues, because you would lose the argument, and you in your small mind think you score points by attacking me instead.
There's only 2 or 3 posters who giggle in the back of the classroom with you as you do this. Everyone has my number? You're really the only one with this creepy obsession.

Now I know I've given you much childish pleasure with this post, but I've gotten it off my chest. Now how about growing up?

Oh goody, a rant. Whatever!

Richie, pretty much every time you post something that you got from Fox Noise or other rightie blogs you're promoting fabrication.

This post is an excellent example of the ignorance faced by serious posters. Thank you.

Dale, Can you post specific links that support your wild claim that Fox News reports are fabrications?

Are you including yourself as a "serious poster"? :confused:

No, I am not kidding! You have made an unfounded assertion and I am asking you to back it up. Can you do it?

TSA misrepresenting the text of the US Constitution in relation to it's abuse of the public trust and in it's overreaching arrogance. Looking forward to the Supreme Court delving into this.

http://politics.gather.com/viewArtic...81474979327740