More expansion of government power and narrowing of constitutional rights from our Republican executive branch: KELO tells us that the TSA has trained hundreds of new "Behavior Detection Officers" to keep us safe at the airports [Matt Belanger, "Watching for Warning Signs," KELOLand.com, 2007.09.24]. Everyone KELO interviews sounds perfectly happy at the prospect of the Thought Police patrolling Joe Foss Field and probably everywhere else:
I'm curious what standards the TSA is about to introduce for probable cause: "His eye was twitchy, so we strip-searched him"? "She looked mad after she turned from the ticket counter"? "He looked away when we looked toward him"?
"If you haven't got anything to hide...." That's not the issue. The Founding Fathers gave us a Fourth Amendment to protect us against a government or government officials that might have something to hide -- i.e., corrupt reasons for wanting to harass, detain, or otherwise harm an innocent citizen. The government's interpretation of a person's possible state of mind seems a far cry from actionable evidence of wrongdoing. Instead, the new Thought Police (Behavior Detection Officers -- who comes up with these names?) are a violation of privacy of the grossest kind, an erasure of the last self-defining boundary permitted to citizens, their thoughts and emotions.
And again, this is a Republican executive branch creating the Thought Police. No wonder the GOP is losing members while Libertarian membership jumps 18%. (Dems are losing members, too, but that's another post.) Not everyone is as sheepish about the Bill of Rights as the KELO interviewees who make the air.
Once again, the government revokes the Constitution in airports. All the more reason to avoid airports altogether and drive. See you on the highway!
- “It just makes you feel good that they're there in the background,” said Cindy Maffei from Willow Lake.
- “I'm in favor of whatever we can do to reinforce and strengthen security,” John Housiaux said.
- “If you've got something to hide what you worry about being watched but if you haven't got anything to hide what does it matter,” Housiaux said.
I'm curious what standards the TSA is about to introduce for probable cause: "His eye was twitchy, so we strip-searched him"? "She looked mad after she turned from the ticket counter"? "He looked away when we looked toward him"?
"If you haven't got anything to hide...." That's not the issue. The Founding Fathers gave us a Fourth Amendment to protect us against a government or government officials that might have something to hide -- i.e., corrupt reasons for wanting to harass, detain, or otherwise harm an innocent citizen. The government's interpretation of a person's possible state of mind seems a far cry from actionable evidence of wrongdoing. Instead, the new Thought Police (Behavior Detection Officers -- who comes up with these names?) are a violation of privacy of the grossest kind, an erasure of the last self-defining boundary permitted to citizens, their thoughts and emotions.
And again, this is a Republican executive branch creating the Thought Police. No wonder the GOP is losing members while Libertarian membership jumps 18%. (Dems are losing members, too, but that's another post.) Not everyone is as sheepish about the Bill of Rights as the KELO interviewees who make the air.
Once again, the government revokes the Constitution in airports. All the more reason to avoid airports altogether and drive. See you on the highway!
Kinda like the "Politcally Correct" movement on college and university campuses, don't you think?
ReplyDeleteActually, the Behavior Detection patrols are worse. The PC movement, reprehensible and narrow-minded as it is, at least acts on expression. I might be thinking conservative thoughts at Berkeley, but they don't try busting me until I act on them. The Bush TSA Thought Police are coming into people's minds by who-knows-what slapdash quack-psych methods and (I assume) detaining and searching people before they've even said a word.
ReplyDeletePC is bad: TSA Thought Police are worse.
When I am about to set foot on an airplane from which there is no return until it lands, and over which I have no control as to who is riding with me, I have no qualms at all with however many people are watching my back and trying to protect my safety in the airport itself. These are not thought police; they are people trained in observing people and their actions, and as far as I know they have no way of actually reading anyone's thoughts.
ReplyDeleteBesides, we already have thought police. What do you think of the hate crime legislation? This is nothing but complete thought police in action. Who is to determine a crime is a hate crime? Why wasn't the Jena 6 deemed a hate crime? Probably because it was black on white and not white on black. In actuality it's impossible to ascertain a person's state of mind during a crime, but evidently those in favor of the hate crime legislation don't realize this. This is much more a case of thought police than behavior patrols at airports.
Interesting. Apparently there's the conservative conception of "Thought Police" (PC enforcers) and the liberal conception of "Thought Police" (government mind-readers). Again, I agree in part with the conservative position: I oppose hate crime legislation on the ground that legal action should be based on actions, not thoughts. Nonnie is correct in saying that the legal system cannot accurately ascertain a person's mindset; speculation about mindset thus makes an awful, far too subjective basis for arrest or prosecution.
ReplyDeleteBut that position makes the airport Thought Police all the worse. They aren't watching your back; they're watching your face, your body language, and the inside of your mind, and they're ready to pounce on you the moment you exhibit some characteristic their training says suggests deception or ill will.
Hate itself is not a crime. It's not healthy, it's not admirable, but it's not legally actionable. If you want to hate someone (or even some group), well, you have that right. But if you act on that hate in a way that causes harm, then you're in trouble.
Ditto with your rights at the airport. If you have deceptive, angry, or nervous thoughts, that's your business. You may hate the TSA and dread interacting with them for fear they will detain you and stripsearch you. You may hate the Patriot Act and the fear-mongering of the government. You may even think violent revolution is necessary to overthrow the regime. The government has no business attempting to invade your mental or emotional privacy to determine your exact state of mind. The government certainly can't threaten to detain you on the grounds that you aren't thinking happy thoughts. The government can only step in when you start acting on those thoughts and emotions in ways that do verifiable social harm.
When I am about to drive down the entrance ramp onto I-29 or I-90, from which there is no return until the next exit, and over which I have no control as to who is driving alongside me, I have no qualms at all with however many people are watching my back and trying to protect my safety on the interstate highway itself. Thus, there is absolutely no reason that police should not be able to stop all motor vehicles and search them for any reason.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't want the police patting you down, you must have something to hide.
Stunning. Maybe the concept of probable cause --as well as the whole Constitution -- really is dead.
ReplyDeleteI have nothing to hide. I also don't want the police patting me down. Ever. Explain that.
And in terms of having nothing to hide, I'm not the one posting anonymously.
ReplyDelete