I recently contacted Congressman Gary Peters's office regarding the new TSA security theater and Ron Paul's bill to hold the TSA goons accountable. As a software consultant, I am on a plane at least twice a week and find the screening procedures reprehensible.
At least twice a week I have to decide whether to go through Airport gas chambers or be subjected to sexual assault.
Here is Peters's response:
Dear Crippy:
Thank you for contacting me about Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screening procedures. I greatly appreciate you taking the time to express your views on this important matter. Your input is, and will always be, welcomed and appreciated.
Over the past year, TSA has installed whole body imaging (WBI) systems at airport security checkpoints around the United States. Previously, the systems were used on a trial basis at a limited number of airports. They are now being used as a primary screening method at most large passenger airports. These systems capture an image of what lies underneath an individual's clothing. Critics have referred to this as a "virtual strip search." If an individual considers this screening method too invasive or revealing or simply prefers not to undergo this electronic search, TSA provides the option of submitting to a pat-down search instead.
In response to aircraft bombing attempts, including an attempt on a flight landing at Detroit Metro Airport on Christmas Day 2009, and intelligence regarding developing terrorist explosives concealment methods, TSA also has changed pat-down procedures to more thoroughly inspect individuals for concealed items. The use of pat-down procedures has also become more frequent, including searches conducted at gates immediately prior to boarding.
The use of WBI and enhanced pat-downs has been controversial, especially during times of increased traffic such as Thanksgiving. In response to concerns over the invasiveness of these procedures, Rep. Ron Paul has introduced H.R. 6416, the American Traveler Dignity Act. This legislation would substantially change the immunity given to federal government employees, such as TSA workers, for work-related acts. Under current law, no federal employee can be held personally liable for acts within the scope of his or her employment. TSA employees have "qualified immunity," meaning that if the employee reasonably believed the conduct was legal, the employee will not be held personally liable.
While I believe that we need to reevaluate our screening procedures to maximize protection and security and minimize invasiveness and inconvenience to travelers, I do not believe that H.R. 6416 provides an appropriate response. Putting TSA employees at risk of potentially frivolous lawsuits is not the best way to keep us safe or protect our privacy. While disciplinary action, including termination, is absolutely appropriate for TSA workers who go outside the bounds of established procedures while conducting enhanced pat-downs, these workers should not be sued for simply doing their job. Congress, President Obama, and the TSA must work together to revaluate current policies and ensure that the laws and regulations governing airport screening keep us safe without unnecessary intrusions on personal privacy.
The White House and the head of the TSA, John Pistole, have recently said they will consider making some changes to these new airport security policies, although these changes are unlikely to take place before the end of the 2010 holiday season. For example, TSA is now working on software that will replace more detailed body outlines produced by WBI with a generic stick-figure-like image that highlights potential weapons requiring additional screening.
I will continue to monitor action on this important issue by the White House and TSA. I will certainly keep your views in mind should legislation addressing enhanced airport security procedures reach the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote.
I would like to thank you again for contacting me. I always enjoy hearing from constituents and hope that you take the time to contact me again soon. For more information, please feel free to visit my website, http://www.peters.house.gov.
The self righteous Peters is eager to defend the rights of the criminal TSA perpetrators but is not concerned at all with the violation of the natural rights of his constituents. He's horrified at the thought of a TSA goon being frivolously sued but thinks nothing of my Fourth Amendment rights being trampled on as a matter of course.
So, for whom, exactly, does Mr. Peters work? From his letter is clear he doesn't work for the people he supposedly represents.
I know. I know. The new security theater is for my own safety.
Please excuse me if I find this hard to swallow. In fact, anything the government, especially the federal government says, I'm inclined to believe the 180 degree opposite.
