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Will it be challenged as being superseded by Federal Law?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/

Originally Posted by RichieLion

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Will it be challenged as being superseded by Federal Law?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

Originally Posted by RichieLion

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Will it be challenged as being superseded by Federal Law?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/

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?

Originally Posted by RichieLion

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/

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

Originally Posted by RichieLion

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/

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

Originally Posted by RichieLion

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/

Originally Posted by Xavier

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

How does inspecting "your junk" keep us safe?

Originally Posted by graciegirl

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.

Originally Posted by Xavier

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

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

Originally Posted by RichieLion

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.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

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

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

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...ping-law_n.htm

Originally Posted by Pturner

But the state legislature still has a House and Senate.

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.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

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.