Six year old girl groped by TSA (video)

[DaBangEm]

I watched it again and still didn't find it to be offensive. The only thing offensive was the title of the video because it exploits the public's fear of pedophilia. It manipulated you into thinking a pat down was sexually improper. I felt bad for the little girl and thought that search was a waste of time, but to imply that was some kind of sexual assult, groping, or fondling is ridiculous.

Trust me, if you've been groped before... you would know that pat down was just a pat down.

The video is what the video is. I'm really surprised by the responses. No one seems to mind all that much that our free society is turning more and more into a police state. Seems like most are totally comfortable trading in freedom for "safety".

 

[jackangel]

What is this absolute certainty you have regarding the Constitution and the intentions of the Founding Fathers?

In the end, there are only words which we can interpret. People have been arguing over this shit for centuries. You have access only to your opinion, however well-informed it may or may not be. The key word in the text of the Fourth Amendment, as I see it, is "unreasonable." That, right there, is open to a motherfuck-ton of interpretation. Having each passenger's anal cavity thoroughly probed before boarding would probably be unreasonable. Being subject to a pat-down (or groping, if you like) ... that's a lot less unreasonable. You might even say that it is reasonable.

By the way, I do believe the Founding Good Bros were smart enough to know their limitations, and that the articles they put forth in documents like the Constitution were not meant to be treated like the word of God, nor should they be used to enforce a unilateral and inflexible interpretation of anyone's so-called rights.

Citing something as unconstitutional isn't much of an argument. You're not doing anything more than saying our rights have been violated, but without really justifying or trying to argue that we even have such a right.

As George Carlin said...there's no such fucking thing as "rights." They're imaginary. You can believe in whatever you want, and if you get together with a large enough group of people that agrees with you, maybe you can form a civilization. But they still don't exist outside your head. The Constitution provides a framework for preserving and even debating what rights we should have, according to some people, but you can't use it as some ideological and inviolable safe haven for the brain dead.

 

[75th]

What is this absolute certainty you have regarding the Constitution and the intentions of the Founding Fathers?

In the end, there are only words which we can interpret. People have been arguing over this shit for centuries. You have access only to your opinion, however well-informed it may or may not be. The key word in the text of the Fourth Amendment, as I see it, is "unreasonable." That, right there, is open to a motherfuck-ton of interpretation. Having each passenger's anal cavity thoroughly probed before boarding would probably be unreasonable. Being subject to a pat-down (or groping, if you like) ... that's a lot less unreasonable. You might even say that it is reasonable.

By the way, I do believe the Founding Good Bros were smart enough to know their limitations, and that the articles they put forth in documents like the Constitution were not meant to be treated like the word of God, nor should they be used to enforce a unilateral and inflexible interpretation of anyone's so-called rights.

Citing something as unconstitutional isn't much of an argument. You're not doing anything more than saying our rights have been violated, but without really justifying or trying to argue that we even have such a right.

As George Carlin said...there's no such fucking thing as "rights." They're imaginary. You can believe in whatever you want, and if you get together with a large enough group of people that agrees with you, maybe you can form a civilization. But they still don't exist outside your head. The Constitution provides a framework for preserving and even debating what rights we should have, according to some people, but you can't use it as some ideological and inviolable safe haven for the brain dead.

lol

 

[DaBangEm]

What is this absolute certainty you have regarding the Constitution and the intentions of the Founding Fathers?

In the end, there are only words which we can interpret. People have been arguing over this shit for centuries. You have access only to your opinion, however well-informed it may or may not be. The key word in the text of the Fourth Amendment, as I see it, is "unreasonable." That, right there, is open to a motherfuck-ton of interpretation. Having each passenger's anal cavity thoroughly probed before boarding would probably be unreasonable. Being subject to a pat-down (or groping, if you like) ... that's a lot less unreasonable. You might even say that it is reasonable.

By the way, I do believe the Founding Good Bros were smart enough to know their limitations, and that the articles they put forth in documents like the Constitution were not meant to be treated like the word of God, nor should they be used to enforce a unilateral and inflexible interpretation of anyone's so-called rights.

Citing something as unconstitutional isn't much of an argument. You're not doing anything more than saying our rights have been violated, but without really justifying or trying to argue that we even have such a right.

As George Carlin said...there's no such fucking thing as "rights." They're imaginary. You can believe in whatever you want, and if you get together with a large enough group of people that agrees with you, maybe you can form a civilization. But they still don't exist outside your head. The Constitution provides a framework for preserving and even debating what rights we should have, according to some people, but you can't use it as some ideological and inviolable safe haven for the brain dead.

I have stated more than a fair share of my own ideas and scenarios. Not just cited the 4th. If you are too lazy to go back and read them that's fine. And yes it is a framework to be interpreted but as I see it and most reasonable folk at "pat down" of a six year old who has done nothing at all merely gone to the airport with her parents for sone type of trip was randomly picked for this search. Like I said before, IMO it is invasive. If you think it's not that's your prerogative. But searching a comedians data base for life works is not usually a good idea.

The bill of rights was put in place for a reason. Not to give us rights per say but to keep the government from over stepping their bounds. protecting it's citizens from power hungry politicians and special interest groups. From the looks of it it's working because people like you don't give to much a care of the loss of these rights and the encroachment of uncle Sam in every facet of our lives. No wonder we pay more and more in taxes. You all don't give a shit what the government does. They must have our best interest at heart...right? Keep a blind eye to what the politicians do with our bill of rights. Soon enough they will all be dwindled away because no one cared when they slowly but surely took a little here and a little there. But hey, it's all for our safety right??? What a joke.

 

[nefertiti]

I watched it again and still didn't find it to be offensive. The only thing offensive was the title of the video because it exploits the public's fear of pedophilia. It manipulated you into thinking a pat down was sexually improper. I felt bad for the little girl and thought that search was a waste of time, but to imply that was some kind of sexual assult, groping, or fondling is ridiculous.

Trust me, if you've been groped before... you would know that pat down was just a pat down.

I haven't read everything posted here but I watched the video and wasn't horrified...The lady seemed like she was trying to be as gentle as possible. I don't know much about TSA proceedure, but there probably isn't much, if any leeway for her to make judgement calls regarding screening.

WTF are they doing posting it online though? If you feel like your daughter was violated, why the fuck would you want millions of people watching it happen? I'd raise hell if I felt that way, but I sure as shit wouldn't make an instant celebrity of my child and exploit something that was allegedly traumatizing (so mom claims).

 

[cindylou]

I haven't read everything posted here but I watched the video and wasn't horrified...The lady seemed like she was trying to be as gentle as possible. I don't know much about TSA proceedure, but there probably isn't much, if any leeway for her to make judgement calls regarding screening.

WTF are they doing posting it online though? If you feel like your daughter was violated, why the fuck would you want millions of people watching it happen? I'd raise hell if I felt that way, but I sure as shit wouldn't make an instant celebrity of my child and exploit something that was allegedly traumatizing (so mom claims).

Because they (the parents) have an agenda. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree..but it's so obvious its insulting...I'm just watching everyone get manipulated by the title of the vid..and it's all over the news. The girl is not being groped? Am I taking crazy pills?! Parents everywhere are going OMG THE OUTRAGE.....well I"m sure that the TSA have done things to be outraged about..but not this.

 

[nefertiti]

Because they (the parents) have an agenda. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree..but it's so obvious its insulting...I'm just watching everyone get manipulated by the title of the vid..and it's all over the news. The girl is not being groped? Am I taking crazy pills?!

That was the other thing that bothered me....the whole thing is so contrived. They started filming before the pat down, like they knew what was going to happen. Who's to say they didn't refuse a full body scan just to trigger this? (the mother asks for a re-scan, but I'm betting she means the metal detector). Plus, since they were returning from vacation, they already flew once with her and had to know the options, and they went with the pat down.

 

[jackangel]

I have stated more than a fair share of my own ideas and scenarios. Not just cited the 4th. If you are too lazy to go back and read them that's fine. And yes it is a framework to be interpreted but as I see it and most reasonable folk at "pat down" of a six year old who has done nothing at all merely gone to the airport with her parents for sone type of trip was randomly picked for this search. Like I said before, IMO it is invasive. If you think it's not that's your prerogative. But searching a comedians data base for life works is not usually a good idea.

The bill of rights was put in place for a reason. Not to give us rights per say but to keep the government from over stepping their bounds. protecting it's citizens from power hungry politicians and special interest groups. From the looks of it it's working because people like you don't give to much a care of the loss of these rights and the encroachment of uncle Sam in every facet of our lives. No wonder we pay more and more in taxes. You all don't give a shit what the government does. They must have our best interest at heart...right? Keep a blind eye to what the politicians do with our bill of rights. Soon enough they will all be dwindled away because no one cared when they slowly but surely took a little here and a little there. But hey, it's all for our safety right??? What a joke.

I think I've read all your posts in the thread, my negro, but I won't go back and make sure. Please forgive the laziness on my part. I must not have been impressed by it.

I actually dislike and distrust this government. I think they've earned it, and it's in my nature to dislike things. I don't disagree with the idea that government encroaches upon (my idea of) of freedom, or that politicians are lying sacks of faggot-shit. However, I don't think your case is all that strong when it comes to airport security, whether or not it's actually effective.

I'm not particularly interested in this case. You disagree with current airport security protocol in general, right? There's no need to use a sensationalist example like this one to make your point. Forget the kid, it's not about her.

By the way, what exactly have you ever done in your life? I'll assume that you're a crusader for justice and freedom, otherwise your post is foolish.

Complaining on the Internet may feel good, but it accomplishes zero.

 

[DaBangEm]

I think I've read all your posts in the thread, my negro, but I won't go back and make sure. Please forgive the laziness on my part. I must not have been impressed by it.

I actually dislike and distrust this government. I think they've earned it, and it's in my nature to dislike things. I don't disagree with the idea that government encroaches upon (my idea of) of freedom, or that politicians are lying sacks of faggot-shit. However, I don't think your case is all that strong when it comes to airport security, whether or not it's actually effective.

I'm not particularly interested in this case. You disagree with current airport security protocol in general, right? There's no need to use a sensationalist example like this one to make your point. Forget the kid, it's not about her.

By the way, what exactly have you ever done in your life? I'll assume that you're a crusader for justice and freedom, otherwise your post is foolish.

Complaining on the Internet may feel good, but it accomplishes zero.

I'm glad I'm worthless. Let's just just say in my free time I pursue and help organize political groups. Now I'm just really another nobody in middle class USA. I guess I'm just foolish stating my opinion on an AAS forum with other bro's and bra's. I'm obviously not gonna change anybody's mind about this subject. Either you are fine with Uncle Sam stripping you of your rights and you trust the government or you are not ok with it and the endless onslaught of laws and regulations. I think it's moot of what the parents agenda was or is. I am just as upset seeing a middle aged man or woman having to go through this. I also recognize the fact that the TSA agent was respectful and professional throughout the process. I actually think they hate this more than the people going through it.

It creeps me out more so because it always starts out small then the next thing you know we are living in a police state. Sure were not on the doorstep but we are just a little step closer. Classic tortoise and the hair, slow and steady wins the race. I don't think TSA equals bomb or terrorist free flight.

Sorry if I didn't impress you with my writings. I was just stating my opinion and not looking to steal Obama's next Pulitzer.

 

[nefertiti]

I'm not fine with my rights being stripped...I just don't really see airport security as a denial of rights. Flying is a choice, not something anyone is forced to do (pretty sure that got covered somewhere in this thread, but I am too lazy to go back and look for the rebuttal).