

Introducing the American Traveler Dignity Act - hornokplease
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1796&Itemid=60

======
ataggart
Could a resident lawyer explain the full effect of this bill?

Text of the bill:

SECTION 1. NO IMMUNITY FOR CERTAIN AIRPORT SCREENING METHODS.

No law of the United States shall be construed to confer any immunity for a
Federal employee or agency or any individual or entity that receives Federal
funds, who subjects an individual to any physical contact (including contact
with any clothing the individual is wearing), x-rays, or millimeter waves, or
aids in the creation of or views a representation of any part of a
individual's body covered by clothing as a condition for such individual to be
in an airport or to fly in an aircraft. The preceding sentence shall apply
even if the individual or the individual's parent, guardian, or any other
individual gives consent.

~~~
swombat
IANAL, but I believe it means that if you misbehave while giving a pat-down or
by storing child porn pictures from the x-ray scanner, you will got to jail
and the organisation responsible for your actions will go down in flames, just
the same as if you were guilty of sexual assault or pedophily and they
condoned it with company policy, no matter whether anyone gave consent for you
to perform your dirty deeds.

This puts enormous emphasis on airports and/or security organisations to make
absolutely god damn sure that no such misbehaviour happen, unless they want to
be wide open to lawsuits that will tear them to shreds.

~~~
c1sc0
How could "storing child pictures from the x-ray scanner" _every_ qualify as
child porn?!

~~~
swombat
They're pictures of naked children.

If an underage teenager texting a naked picture of themselves qualifies as a
child pornographer, a TSA employee storing pictures of a naked child certainly
does too.

~~~
c1sc0
Doesn't mean it is right though. Wikipedia: "Pornography or porn is the
portrayal of explicit sexual subject matter for the purposes of sexual
excitement and erotic satisfaction." How is a simple picture of a naked child
explicit or exciting?

~~~
oiuyhgrftgthyju
It does with kids - there is no artistic defense - if it's pink it's porn.

~~~
c1sc0
Really? Pink is porn now? Well, suit you sir, suit you!

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amor_Vincit_Omnia_(Caravaggio)>

~~~
oiuyhgrftgthyju
This page got wikipedia temprarily banned in the UK
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Killer>

Of course you could still buy the album in the shops

------
scrrr
I find it funny that there's a bigger uproar against airport security
screenings than there is against a war where civilians are injured and killed.
Both are related to terror, but what a difference in perception.

~~~
yummyfajitas
I can think of a fairly rational reason for it.

In the case of airport screenings, it's pretty clear that cost >> benefit.
Cost = sleazy govt employee looking/touching at my balls, and maybe saving the
photos. Benefit = risk of death reduced by an amount less than 1 extra gym
session per year.

In the case of the assorted wars, it's not as clear. Cost = visible casualties
of real war in Afghanistan. Benefit = preventing the invisible casualties of
10-15 years more living under the Taliban + invisible civil wars that would
have eventually overthrown the Taliban.

(Fun fact: on 9/12 or 9/13, shortly after Osama was labelled as the culprit,
an Afghani friend IMed me. "I'm very sorry for what happened to your country,
but this could be the greatest thing that ever happened to mine." He then
expressed a hope that we wouldn't "pull a somalia".)

~~~
dionidium
How does your friend feel about it now?

~~~
yummyfajitas
Haven't spoken with him in a while, but his biggest concern the last time we
spoke was that Hillary might beat Rudy and abandon Afghanistan. He drew
analogies to Bill abandoning Somalia and Rwanda.

His general perspective was that you have war/tyranny regardless of US
involvement, but at least with US involvement there is hope for the future. He
was also pretty critical of western anti-war types - he thought they cared
more not seeing war on TV than actually about the actual victims of
war/tyranny.

(Note: his perspective was a little unusual by Afghani standards. He wasn't
Muslim and only part of his family escaped to US (in 1996) on refugee visas,
fleeing persecution. )

------
waynecolvin
So how is security and privacy dealt with in other countries? Especially the
ones with a better security track record.

~~~
rmc
They don't go starting wars.

~~~
ams6110
Which war are you talking about, and who really started it?

~~~
rmc
Iraq and Afghanistan. Both started by the USA.

------
ck2
If it doesn't strike down the $10,000 civil fine (which could make you lose
your house, think about it) it's pointless.

Is there a record of how many bills Ron Paul has gotten passed? Because if
he's as loony as his son, this is never going to get serious attention (anyone
can introduce a bill and anyone else can put a hold on it too).

------
ams6110
_My legislation is simple. It establishes that airport security screeners are
not immune from any US law regarding physical contact with another person,
making images of another person, or causing physical harm through the use of
radiation-emitting machinery on another person. It means they are subject to
the same laws as the rest of us._

This seems to me to target the wrong people. Most of the screeners are just
doing their jobs. They are not the ones who decided to use these machines or
implement the groping policy.

~~~
sixtofour
They give up their rights when they put on their uniform.

------
goldenthunder
lol silly ron paul.

