I apologize, over the business of the holidays I have neglected our carnival. So, some of this might be a little dated, and it definitely built up…so this is a big one.
Mike Minton at Mr. Right Opinion presents An Open Letter to The Kentucky G…

1) McCarran in Las Vegas has a line marked “SSSSS only” now. Of course, this is the one time since they started marking tickets that I haven’t had SSSSS on mine (see #2) so I had to wait in the long line. I just can’t win.

2) Last night in San Jose the “match the ID with the boarding pass” guy pulled out the orange highlighter to mark my boarding pass and remarked that I was “special.” (By the way, the vast majority of TSA call you “special” when you have SSSSS). I replied with my usual, “Yeah, I always am.”

That’s when the game changed from anything I’d seen before. Instead of chuckling and giving me a “Happy New Year”, he asked me, “Why do you think that is?” Being the quick individual that I am, I responded, “Because I always buy my ticket at the gate.” As his eyebrow went up, I finally realized that I was getting the question screening and explained that my habit is one of the unfortunate side effects of being a ferry pilot – you never know where you are taking the airplane until the last minute, and you don’t know when you are going to get there until you land. He nodded, gave me my “Happy New Year” and I went through my special screening.

The thing that strikes me as intelligent about screening questions is that if you combine the knowledge a few simple questions give the screener with the contents of carryon and checked bags, the technique could be extremely effective at both keeping people honest and screwing the ACLU into the ceiling!

So I’m going to look into this further (when I get some time). I’ll try to put up a specific post detailing what I find. Just wanted to let you know I haven’t forgotten about this, or that I’m ignoring you.

I had to traveled to Denver three weeks after 9/11. The plane was almost deserted, except for me and about 15 other people. There were three middle eastern men on that flight. One sat in the first class section, one sat in the middle of the plane, and the other one sat in the back. They sat apart in the waiting area of the airport but would walk over and talk to each other occassionally. I almost didn’t board tht plane. They acted nervous the entire trip. The captain locked his cock pit door and didn’t open it till he got to Denver.
I was totally frightened.

I was happy when they started searching random flyers. When they check my Drivers lisence, and match it with my ticket, I fell more secure. I’m just an average citizen who wants to board a plane and make it safely to my destination.

From http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd141.htm
Walking into or exiting a hotel, bank or “other public places” is a fundamental right and an action freely chosen by an individual; it is not a mandated activity by any federal, state or local law, ordinance or statute. Free Americans have a constitutional right to travel which is protected by the U.S. Constitution; see Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 35, 49 (1868)(“We are all citizens of the United States, and as members of the same community must have the right to pass and repass through every part of it without interruption, as freely as in our own states”); Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125, 78 S.Ct. 1113, 1118 (1958)(“The right to travel is a part of the ‘liberty’ of which the citizen cannot be deprived without the due process of law under the Fifth Amendment”); United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 757, 86 S.Ct. 1170, 1178 (1966)(“The constitutional right to travel from one State to another, and necessarily to use the highways and other instrumentalities of interstate commerce in doing so, occupies a position fundamental to the concept of our Federal Union”);

Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 629, 89 S.Ct. 1322, 1329 (1969)(“This Court long ago recognized that the nature of our Federal Union and our constitutional concepts of personal liberty unite to require that all citizens be free to travel throughout the length and breadth of our land uninhibited by statutes, rules or regulations which unreasonably burden or restrict this movement”) Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 339, 92 S.Ct. 995, 1001 (1972)(“….since the right to travel was a constitutionally protected right, ‘any classification which serves to penalize the exercise of that right unless shown to be necessary to promote a compelling governmental interest, is unconstitutional’”);(The Court in Dunn also declared that “The right to travel is an ‘unconditional personal right, ‘ a right whose exercise may not be conditioned.’” Id, at 341); and Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County, 415 U.S. 250, 254, 94 S.Ct. 1076, 1080(1974)(“The right of interstate travel has repeatedly been recognized as a basic constitutional freedom”).

See also Schachtman v. Dulles 225 F2d. 938, 941 (D.C.Cir. 1955)(“The right to travel, to go from place to place as the means of transportation permit, is a natural right subject to the rights of others and to reasonable regulation under law”); Worthy v. Herter, 270 F.2d 905, 908 (D.C.Cir. 1959)(“The right to travel is a part of the right to liberty”); Cole v. Housing Authority of City of Newport, 435 F2.d 807, 809 (1st Cir.1970)(“…the right to travel is a fundamental personal right that can be impinged only if to do so is necessary to promote a compelling governmental interest”); King v. New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority, 442 F.2d 646, 648 (2nd Cir. 1971)(“It would be meaningless to describe the right to travel between states as a fundamental precept of personal liberty and not to acknowledge a correlative constitutional right to travel within a state”); and

Demiragh v. DeVos, 476 F.2d 403, 405 (2nd Cir. 1973)(“…the fight to travel….[is] a ‘fundamental’ one, requiring the showing of a ‘compelling state or local interest to warrant its limitation”); United States v. Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 912 (9th Cir. 1973)(“….it is firmly settled that freedom to travel at home and abroad without unreasonable governmental restriction is a fundamental constitutional right of every American citizen….At the minimum, governmental restrictions upon freedom to travel are to be weighed against the necessity advanced to justify them, and a restriction that burdens the right to travel ‘too broadly and indiscriminately’ cannot be sustained”); and McLellan v. Miss. Power & Light Co., 545 F.2d 919, 923 n. 8 (5th Cir. 1977)(“The Constitutional right to travel is ‘among the rights and privileges of National citizenship”);

Costa v. Bluegrass Turf Service, Inc., 406 F.Supp. 1003, 1007 (E.D.Ken. 1975)(“…pure administrative convenience, standing alone, is an insufficient basis for an enactment which…restricts the right to travel”); Coolman v. Robinson, 452 F.Supp. 1324, 1326 (N.D.Ind. 1978)(“The right to travel is a very old and well established constitutional right”); Tetalman v. Holiday Inn, 500 F.Supp. 217, 218 (N.D.Ga. 1980)(“the constitutionally protected right to travel…is basically the right to travel unrestricted by unreasonable government interference or regulation”); Bergman v. United States, 565 F.Supp. 1353, 1397 (W.D. Mich. 1983)(“The right to travel interstate is a basic, fundamental right under the Constitution, its origins premised upon a variety of constitutional provisions”).

This right to travel is also a constitutional right under our state constitution, embodied within its “liberty” provisions; People v. Olivas (1976) 17 Cal.3d 235, 131 Cal. Rptr. 55, 551 P.2d 375, 381 (right to travel is a fundamental liberty interested protected by the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; further “We conclude that personal liberty is a fundamental interest, second only to life itself, as an interest protected under both the California and United States Constitutions,” 551 P.2d at 384); People v. Horton (1971) 14 CalApp.3d 930, 92 Ca.Rptr. 666, 668 (“…the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference…is a fundamental constitutional right”).

But all the legal mumbo jumbo aside , No one has said it better than Ben Franklin: They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security

http://www.hlswatch.com/2005/12/29/

I don’t agree with alot of what the ACLU does most times. Sometimes when they protest it ends up not being valid but at least they do serve the role of questioning government. Given we live in an era where government can go to far? The ACLU is a necessary evil in my opinion and at times? They actually do perform an important service to Americans.

I understand why some people are against the concept of racial profiling, but I agree with you that searching 90 year old grandmothers shouldn’t be a priority unless they start deciding to take over a plane. Or searching me for that matter, I’m not frail but at 46 and white I think everyone on the plane is pretty safe from those like me. Unless of course they run out of nuts and try to give me pretzels…