TSA: The natural enemy of the 4th Amendment

I don't really remember how airport security was before 9/11. I know we had to go through metal detectors. I know that our carry-on bags were x-rayed. But beyond that, I don't remember much more intrusion than the annoyance of long lines. And then 9/11 happened. And in the wake of the confusion and horror, the TSA rose as the unequivocal authority on airline safety. Originally under the Department of Transportation, the TSA was sucked into the black hole of the Department of Homeland Security shortly after the DHS's creation.

I think that the TSA is a perfect example of what would happen if government standardization trumped the free market. Prior to 9/11, aiport passenger screening was handled by private companies who were contracted by the owner of the terminal (airline or other private entity). Certainly there were bound to be screw-ups and misfires; we're only human after all. Once the government took over the show, the level of competence and the standard of "care" fell rapidly.

A few examples of mismanagement and general asshat-ery by the TSA: 1) spending $500 for cheese displays during an awards banquet in 2004, 2) selling the banned items left by passengers at airport checkpoints, 3) requiring a woman to remove her nipple piercings with pliers behind a flimsy curtain, and 4) playing an April Fools joke on an asthmatic passenger.

I think it's generally accepted that the TSA is a waste of tax-payers' money, has no reason existing, and should be demolished immediately. Well, at least I think so. The latest news in airport security is the potential implementation of full body scanners. These machines will allow highly trained and certified TSA screeners to see intimate details of passengers. Think Superman's x-ray vision. The machines are strong enough to see everyone's bits and pieces. At $170K they're very affordable.

The only fly in the ointment appears to be some opposition in the name of that pesky thing, privacy. Why are these scanners necessary? In an age where we know everything that terrorists are doing thanks our friendly neighborhood waterboarders, why are we still giving airline passengers the third degree?

Don't worry, Carrie- you're not alone

Carrie Prejean's impassioned speech at her recent press conference with Donald Trump brought up a disconcerting issue into the spotlight: Americans don't understand their Constitution. Prejean claimed to have exercised her freedom of speech, and when she did that, she was punished. Keith Olbermann had some commentary on that last night:


Though it is enjoyable to poke a little fun at Prejean for the preposterous situation she's in that continues to blow up, she is not alone in her misconceptions about what rights are guaranteed by our Constitution.

Back in 2006, the McCormick Tribune Freedom Museum published a study about how well Americans know the Constitution. The results were not promising. Almost 20% believed that owning a pet was constitutionally protected, and 38% thought that the right against self-incrimination was guaranteed by the First Amendment.

A recent survey by Rasmussen Reports showed that only 75% of those asked thought that the Constitution protected a right to own a gun; 14% said that gun ownership was not protected, and 11% were not sure. Another survey by Rasmussen Reports showed that when asked about how the Constitution "in terms of how it impacts life in our country today," 63% thought it was good to excellent; 21% thought fair, and 12% thought poor.

So the lesson of today is that even when people think that the Constitution is doing ok for them, they really don't know what that means. And how can we expect people to be outraged by the injustices inherent in the system when they don't understand the system?