Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Security Transportation United States News

TSA Doing Random Truck Searches On Tennessee Highway 578

Posted by samzenpus
from the papers-please dept.
OverTheGeicoE writes "TSA is expanding its presence to the American road system. As part of its Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) program, TSA agents are now working at 5 weigh stations and two bus stations in Tennessee. They are randomly checking trucks with 'drug and bomb sniffing dogs', and encouraging truck drivers to join their First Observer Highway Security Program and report anything suspicious that they see to authorities. VIPR is allegedly not a response to any particular threat."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TSA Doing Random Truck Searches On Tennessee Highway

Comments Filter:
  • by unity100 (970058)
    though nothing happened in the last decade and all the ball groping that happened, they are still disturbing and irritating people.

    wow.
    • by oodaloop (1229816)

      though nothing happened in the last decade

      Yeah, and all that time wasted rewriting code for Y2K! Nothing happened!

      • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mug funky (910186) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:12PM (#37785048)

        that analogy is irrelevant. one was a response to something we KNOW was going to happen BEFORE it happened (or rather didn't, due to the dilligent work of those that sought to prevent it), the other was a knee-jerk response to something that should have been spotted before it happened, but wasn't.

        you can't say attacks have been prevented by the TSA's ball groping, and naked-scanning-irradiating-machines without some form of proof. considering the massive scale of abuses the TSA is committing, it'd better be solid proof of thousands of attacks directly foiled by ball-groping, otherwise it simply is not worth the sacrifice in freedom.

        • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jhoegl (638955) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:16PM (#37785104)
          One step closer to police state IMO.

          I hope our freedom was worth it.
          • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Mitchell314 (1576581) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:21PM (#37785156)
            I'm normally not one for slipper slope arguments, but this is a creep that is happening right before our eyes.
            • by Artifakt (700173)

              The underlying reason 'slippery slope' arguments are considered a logical fallacy is that formal logic uses absolute formulas: ALL men are mortal - Socrates is a man - therefore Socrates is mortal. You can't use logic the same way starting from "MOST men are mortal". It's not considered a proper logical argument to say "If we take step E, we will inevitably eventually end up at Step Z". That doesn't mean it's illogical to argue that a series of events tends in a certain direction, or that it is at least po

        • by oodaloop (1229816)
          How I can I prove a negative? If a terrorist planned on taking over a plane, then abandoned the plan once he saw the security line at the airport, how would anyone know? I, for one, used to carry plastic weapons on planes for self defense. Now, I don't, because I don't want to get caught. I agree the security is too much, but there's no way of knowing what was prevented.
          • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Funny)

            by blair1q (305137) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:52PM (#37785494) Journal

            The fact that there are more people whining about security at airports than dying in hijackings is a good thing. Because back when it was the other way around, that shit was whack.

            • by treeves (963993)

              You mean it was better back when more people were dying in airports than there were people whining about hijackings? I'm not so sure.

              • Re:Wow. (Score:4, Insightful)

                by frosty_tsm (933163) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @10:40PM (#37786948)

                You mean it was better back when more people were dying in airports than there were people whining about hijackings? I'm not so sure.

                When was that, actually?

                No, seriously. No one's getting killed in the airports. There was one horrific day that no one sane wishes to see repeated. Without any change in security, the circumstances that allowed the attack to occur were gone: placid passengers who would quietly let themselves be highjacked.

                More to your point, is it worth it to molest (or violate in another way) one million passengers to save one life? Because at best this is how much protection we are getting from this.

                • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Insightful)

                  by Oxford_Comma_Lover (1679530) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @11:25PM (#37787266)

                  I think he must have meant back in the 70s or so. There was a time period when there was a lot of hijacking, relatively speaking. Then there was almost none for a long time. Then there was 911 and everyone invented a lot of largely irrational security safeguards. If you secure the cockpit door, it becomes almost impossible to hijack a plane. The most you can do is blow one up, and that involves killing fewer people than you would kill if you blew up a bomb at a medium-sized high school sporting event.

                  Which makes the TSA, mostly, a massive way of pumping money into the economy. I don't mind a few of those--it's good to keep people employed--but we should have them employed in a productive way, rather than one which makes the system less efficient. Put them on environmental projects, for example.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward

            How I can I prove a negative? If a terrorist planned on taking over a plane, then abandoned the plan once he saw the security line at the airport, how would anyone know? I, for one, used to carry plastic weapons on planes for self defense. Now, I don't, because I don't want to get caught. I agree the security is too much, but there's no way of knowing what was prevented.

            Yeah...because a terrorist would have seen a gigantic security line at the airport and thought, "damnit, my plan is foiled!" instead of taking the opportunity of the high density of people to start killing them right there.

            • by oodaloop (1229816)
              Well, must be something wrong with that logic, since it hasn't happened. Once. So maybe they don't think the same way you do. I would argue that the 0-50 people waiting in line at any given point isn't worth the effort or risk of being thwarted or arrested.
              • Could it be that the reason no events have been observed is that none existed in the first place, and the threat of terrorism is massively overblown by "security" agencies seeking to motivate/necessitate their own existence?
              • It has happened. In Russia more than once. It was even a story here on /.
          • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Coolhand2120 (1001761) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @08:00PM (#37785552)
            If they catch terrorists that proves they are working well. Which they didn't. So no proof of success there. They did however allow a half dozen to slip by and a few to detonate their bombs on the plane. So there's a priori proof of a 100% failure rate. And by the metric used to measure how successful a government agency is I would say the 100% failure rate for the TSA is an A+. I'll bet this abject failure is even rewarded with a budget increase.
            • by NetNed (955141)
              Not sure. They just forced Orrin Hatch to go through a full body scanner even when he requested not to. It is all being brought up in Senate Judiciary Committee testimony along with Leshy from Vermont complaining that the TSA was trying to punish travelers that opt-ed out of the full body scanners. But then the idiot Janet Napolitano brings up the underwear bomber like that is the jewel of the TSA existence. Funny how she forgets the multiple things the TSA and other departments ignored, pretty close the th
    • Job program. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:15PM (#37785096)

      There are only so many TSA people you can fit inside an airport.

      Let's hire MORE and put them to work ... checking TRUCKS! And buses, yeah! Because that's where the terrorists will strike next.

      In the year 2035, 51% of the population will be employed by the DHS/TSA to watch/search the other 49%.

      • Re:Job program. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:31PM (#37785254) Homepage Journal

        An Israeli security expert, maybe Rafi Sela, said it's a mistake to put threat assessment and security implementation in the same organization. Do that, and it starts inventing reasons why it should grow.

      • Re:Job program. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Grishnakh (216268) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @10:00PM (#37786600)

        Well, it sounds like it's actually been quite successful, just as the TSA airport searches have been successful. People keep saying "but they haven't caught any terrorists!" and "they failed to catch several bombs!", but who cares? That's not the reason for the TSA's existence. The TSA's purpose is to help prosecute the Drug War, and they're doing a pretty good job at that, as they've caught lots of people transporting drugs. This is good because then these people can be thrown into private prisons, and those prisons make more profit, part of which they can give to various politicians in bags handed under the table.

    • by roc97007 (608802)

      Time for a regime change.

  • What is this, I don't even
  • I am almost sure now that this site is just a mirror of drudge.

  • by h4rr4r (612664) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @06:54PM (#37784790)

    Freedom to travel not something we have anymore?
    Should I be carrying my papers?

    At what point do we tell these assholes to fuck off? This is one government department that needs to be shutdown.

    • by L3370 (1421413) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:31PM (#37785258)
      Do some highway driving close to the mexico border and you'll see border patrol already at work doing this. I get pulled into a random search frequently. Drug dog comes by without asking. The agent sets of a series of questions to try and make you trip up.
      Agent: What citizenship are you? me: US...i didn't cross any border... Agent:Where you going?
      me: San Diego
      Agent: Where you coming from?
      me:Phoenix
      Agent: Where do you live?
      me: Phoenix
      Agent: Didnt you just come from El Centro?
      me: well yeah...passed through it driving here... (ohyou.jpg)
      Agent: How long you staying?
      me: 3 days
      Agent: You have anything in the trunk I should know about?
      me: nope
      Agent: 3 days and no clothes?
      me: its in the trunk
      Agent: I thought you said there's nothing in the trunk...(trollface.jpg)

      I didn't sign up for this bullshit...Being treated like an ass, as if it is a priviledge to travel within my own fucking home country and prove I'm not some terrorist to everyone with a uniform.
      • by EdIII (1114411) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:49PM (#37785460)

        Yeah.... I play a different game with those fuckers.

        Agent: What citizenship are you?
        Me: The one on my drivers license.
        Agent: Where you coming from?
        Me: Where I have been.
        Agent: Where do you live?
        me: Where I came from.
        Agent: Didnt you just come from El Centro?
        me: I don't know.
        Agent: El Centro is where you just came from.
        Me: Then why did you ask?
        Agent: How long you staying where you going?
        me: I don't know yet.
        Agent: How could you not know?
        Me: It depends.
        Agent: On what?
        Me: On what happens when I get there
        Agent: You have anything in the trunk I should know about?
        Me: I have no idea.
        Agent: You don't know what is in your trunk?
        Me: No, I know what is in my trunk more or less.
        Agent: Then is there anything I should know about?
        Me: I don't know who you are or what your job description *is* so that is impossible to answer.

        This goes on till one of two things happen. A tazer or they just get frustrated and let me go.

        • by LibRT (1966204) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @08:55PM (#37786062)
          Yes, I've had a similar encounter at one of the arbitrary DUI check points:

          Officer: "Have you had anything to drink tonight?"

          Me: "No."

          Officer: "Where are you going?"

          Me: "That needn't concern you."

          Officer: "Pull over to the side and park your vehicle and get out your papers, now!"

          After producing my papers and waiting over half an hour while they no doubt looked for any possible way to arrest/ticket me, I was released. There was no cause to detain me, other than my refusal to reveal my destination (as is my right). It is odd, but not at all unusual anymore, that the government should exercise its power over individuals for asserting their rights.
          • by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 21, 2011 @03:09AM (#37788212)

            I have a close friend that is a medically discharged veteran that is now fighting MS. He was pulled off a Greyhound bus put up against a wall with 2 TSA "agents" keeping him at gun point with M4 carbines with the safety off. For no real reason, seems like they were just looking for drugs on the bus.

            When asked if he saw anything suspicious, he said he had indeed seen something off being in the US. Some guys with black caps behaving weirdly. When he was asked to describe them further, he described the TSA agents themselves. They weren't too pleased when he told them this was not what he had fought and came back disabled for.

            I can fully understand drug searches, and to some extent support it. But you do NOT pull people off a bus, put them up against the wall and aim weapons at them.
            I'm sure having people exit the bus, sit down on the sidewalk and have your weapons at low ready would be just as useful as the above and far less disrespectful and scarring than the above.

      • by evanism (600676) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @10:35PM (#37786906) Journal

        I'm saying this nicely, as a person from another country, yes, you are signing up for it, because you do nothing.

        Blind Freddy can see you are in a police state, and it's getting worse by the day. The fate of the USA is inevitable.

        So, what are YOU going to do about it?

        Interesting isn't it.

        • by imunfair (877689)

          The time when I noticed it most clearly was recently flying back from a trip in Europe. The airline screening there is about the level the US screening was in the 90's - efficient, pleasant, and necessary. Coming back into the US felt like entering a prison camp - it was very odd. If you don't travel - like many Americans - then you don't really notice it much unless you live in a border state.

          Most of the populace is so stupid and lethargic now that it's not really even worth the effort to try to change it

      • by 7-Vodka (195504) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @11:27PM (#37787278) Journal

        Here's the only thing that should come out of your lips when you are stopped on a non-border crossing:

        Am I being detained or am I free to go?

        repeat several times.

        If they mention anything about searching your vehicle say you know your 4rth and 5th ammendment rights and you do not conscent to any searches.

        Then go back to repeating the first phrase.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by poity (465672)

      These are freight trucks used in commerce -- commonly 18-wheel trailer trucks (American version of container trucks), which are required to weigh in at weight stations at certain intervals on their trip. They are often used for smuggling, which was why the weigh station system was built. They are adding more checks to the process, perhaps not because they think they'll catch anyone outright, but because the knowledge of improved operations will deter those who wish to take advantage of this transport system

      • ...which was why the weigh station system was built.

        This is not true. States have weight limits. Mostly based on the amount of tonnage allowable per axle. They have these for safety, and road maintenance. Smuggling has nothing to do with it, as a weigh station would be useless for finding it, unless your smuggling tons of material. How would a weigh station even detect smuggling? A lot of times trucks aren't weighed upon leaving the terminal, unless it is to measure compliance with local laws about load weight. And truck weight is highly variable too. So if a truck left the depot weighing X (there is no requirement as far as I know to report this to the state, if this measurement is even taken), and ends up at a station weighing X+1, that weight could even fuel, oil, the trucker purchasing souvenirs, a hitchhiker, a passenger, mud stuck to the chassis, etc...

    • by jo42 (227475)

      Let me be the first to say it: "Heil Obama!"

      First Bushtard, now this two-faced fascist is carrying on the previous administrations descent to a police state.

    • by roman_mir (125474)

      So are you voting for the right person for this job [cbsnews.com]?

  • by Dunbal (464142) * on Thursday October 20, 2011 @06:54PM (#37784796)
    All the inconvenience of airport travel, coming soon to a town near you. Oh they will start with the truckers but whoever said the slippery slope is not real: watch. Dear God America, you tell the world about how you are the champion of democracy and freedom and then you go an pull shit like this. And you wonder why no one believes you?
    • by gknoy (899301) <<moc.smetsysizasana> <ta> <yonkg>> on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:10PM (#37785020)

      We say that because it's the ideals that were taught us in grade school, and espoused by the founding fathers. We are roughly as appalled by this as you are, but feel that there's almost nothing we can do about it. Compound this with about half the country feeling directly opposite of us, and clamoring for more paranoia, it's very frustrating. I feel nervous even writing this, and yes I realize that is a bad sign.

      • by mpthompson (457482) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @08:09PM (#37785620)

        By "about half the country feeling directly opposite of us" I have to assume you are talking about the more conservative part of the country. I guess I need to remind you that this program is being put in place and run by the liberals. The fact is, neither end of the political spectrum lack people willing to stomp on the rights of their countrymen to advance their political agendas and consolidate power. Until we get over the "left vs right" paradigm and focus on a "right vs wrong" paradigm this kind of crap will prevail no matter which party is in power.

  • by booch (4157) * <(moc.kehcubgiarc) (ta) (0102todhsals)> on Thursday October 20, 2011 @06:55PM (#37784810) Homepage

    I'm not quite sure how that meets their mission:

    The Transportation Security Administration protects the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.

    Then again, I'm not sure how much of what they do furthers their mission. It would seem that most of the things they do actually restrict freedom of movement.

    • Re:Their mission (Score:5, Informative)

      by Dunbal (464142) * on Thursday October 20, 2011 @06:57PM (#37784836)

      How about this mission statement:

      The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    • Wrong, Comrade! You are so wrong! They are pro-actively protecting us from the imminent threats of massive total destruction by terrorists from Eurasia and Eastasia [wikipedia.org]!

      Welcome, Comrades!
      Welcome to the Glorious Union of Soviet Corporatist Republics!

  • From TFA: "Somebody sees something somewhere and we want them to be responsible citizens, report that and let us work it through our processes to abet the concern that they had when they saw something suspicious," said Paul Armes, TSA Federal Security Director for Nashville International Airport.

    "Yes, I witnessed some people dressed in TSA uniforms at a weigh station, and I suspect they may be impostors. Could you send some agents over to check the situation?"

  • by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:00PM (#37784890)

    VIPR is allegedly not a response to any particular threat

    The threat is very clear - budget cuts. With Osama gone, Al Qaeda a thin shadow of its former self (which was really never much to begin with) and no significant acts of terrorism for the last 10 years, the TSA and the DHS are in jeopardy of being pared back to a size much more appropriate to the risk -- i.e. practically nothing.

    If they don't remind us to be scared, who will?

  • Occupied Country (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bobcat7677 (561727) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:02PM (#37784920) Homepage
    If the "occupy wall st" people added dissolution of the TSA to their agenda, I might join them at this point...
    • Re:Occupied Country (Score:5, Informative)

      by Normal Dan (1053064) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:08PM (#37784992)
      IIRC, Ron Paul wants to do away with the TSA.
      • by mcavic (2007672)
        Ron Paul wants to do away with the federal government, giving the states the right to oppress you however they want.
        • by Rogerborg (306625)
          +1 insightful - in any other article. In this one, +1 funny.
        • I'm going to be a little more straightforward than the ACs:

          Read a fucking book.

        • Well, considering that the states are smaller and it is easier to move out of one of them to another than it is to do so from the entire country, wouldn't you rather oppressing people be left to the states rather than that role being taken by the federal government the way it is now?
      • by LurkerXXX (667952)

        So? He's got a few good ideas along with a lot of nutty ones. What's your point?

      • Ron Paul is on the nutty end of the libertarian stick. He has some good thoughts, but no real plans to implement them that I have seen. And no, just saying "shut it down" is not a viable plan. Money is the only reason anyone pays attention to him. I would not jump on his bandwagon for any cause.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          The US federal budget deficit has exceeded $1 trillion for the third year in a row. Ron Paul proposes $1 trillion in cuts to end the madness, and dumbass Americans think he's on the nutty end.

          I'm just waiting for the next US credit rating downgrade.

  • Tyranny (Score:5, Informative)

    by mbone (558574) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:05PM (#37784950)

    This is the thin leading wedge of tyranny. Everyone involved in the decision making process of this program, starting with Mr. Bill Gibbons, should be fired and banned from Government employment for life, as they have shown themselves as being clearly unworthy of the public trust.

  • "I heard... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by martas (1439879) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:12PM (#37785056)
    that he didn't stand up when they were drinking to Stalin's health." Citizens being urged to report "anything suspicious," leaves a good taste in your mouth, doesn't it?
  • by FyberOptic (813904) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:14PM (#37785080)

    My father drove trucks here for years through Tennessee, and I don't even need to ask him whether he thinks this is a ridiculous waste of time and taxpayer dollars. Every minute they waste off the road is money from their pockets. Especially when in many cases you leave the truck running during all of this bullshit in order to pull it to the various road markers for different pointless checks.

    They will likely never find a single truck carrying anything of federal importance. All they'll do is use it for catching things which the THP or other federal agencies should already be handling, like catching drugs, and add one more level of red tape to the honest hard-working people.

  • Likelihood (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Meneth (872868) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:16PM (#37785106)

    "Where is a terrorist more apt to be found? Not these days on an airplane more likely on the interstate," said Tennessee Department of Safety & Homeland Security Commissioner Bill Gibbons.

    I wonder, has the TSA ever found a real terrorist? Except from their employees, that is. :)

    • I'm not aware of any confirmed instances of a detained bomber at airport security. All the stories come from the ones that have slipped past. Luckily, there were post-9/11 Americans on board are aren't willing to put up with this shit anymore, and every attempt at terrorism in the sky has been thwarted by the passengers.

    • by blair1q (305137)

      They stop about 100 guns a month from being carried on planes by passengers.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:17PM (#37785126)

    Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart.

    Justice Robert Jackson, chief U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials

  • ...I mean, who hasn't wanted to see the naked silhouette of a beltless, shoeless truck driver?
  • To the USSA!
  • This is for your protection.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:29PM (#37785230)

    and I was told I just shouldn't fly on airplanes.

    Then they came for the truck drivers in Tennessee...
    and I was told I just shouldn't drive trucks in Tennessee.

    Then...

    • Adaptations of this quote to every possible privacy or liberty issue deeply offend me.

      This poem was the poignant reflection of a German theologian who was actually very humble and self-effacing in his phrasing. He supported Hitler initially but became disillusioned with the totalitarianism of the National Socialists (Nazis) somewhat quickly and spearheaded a group of German clergy who opposed the party. Most of the group caved, but he stayed the course and was finally arrested in 1937. He spent the rest o
      • by dcollins (135727)

        GP is the single best and most on-topic modification of the original that I've ever seen. You, sir, can go screw yourself.

      • ... and please consider saving it for more extreme situations.

        When would be appropriate, in your opinion? When the damage is already done and there's nobody to listen? The Nazi's didn't START by gassing Jews and invading Poland, you fucking idiot. The guy wrote the poem to illustrate that evil starts small, and needs to be stopped early. Are you seriously suggesting that we wait until it's too powerful to stop, and THEN start complaining about it?

        I don't think I've ever read anything so blatantly stupid.

  • Read the article. These are checks that are already being carried out by actual Tennesee law enforcement. The TSA kabuki clowns are just tagging along to ask if anyone has seen a terrorist.

    They just know they're out there! Surely someone has seen one? Checked in the back? Under the axles, sometimes they latch on, start chewing on the power lines.

    Aw, c'mon, man, give me a break, I have to catch three more terrorists this month or I don't make my rent. Look,just point at some brown-lookin' trucker y

  • by jd2112 (1535857) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:46PM (#37785416)

    First Observer Highway Security Program an report anything suspicious that they see to authorities.

    Mr. Welles, is that you? This whole thing was President Clark's idea wasn't it?
    Are participants required to wear black armbands?
    This will probay get me on the watch list but in my opinion President Clark is nothing but a Shadow puppet.

  • Voting (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hackus (159037) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @07:52PM (#37785490) Homepage

    Does jack squat any more. I watch as these Occupy people sit around and sing songs, people up at the capital sing slogans, and they expect things are going to change.

    Not gonna happen. If you had the ability to print an infinite amount of money and give it to your friends and yourself, would you give up that sort of power and influence?

    You certainly would! Right before you nuke every major city on the globe!

    So this whole crapola thing with the TSA isn't going to go away without a real nasty revolution.

    No way are the people who have that power going to step aside. They will put a terrorist boogey man in every place they can. If they can't they will nuke a city, and tell you if you don't give us complete control, another "terrorist" will nuke another city.

    This is way out of control of the voting booth now.

    I would seriously consider having a plan in place to leave the country sooner than later.

    Because, if history is any guide, the next thing TSA will be doing is preventing any people from leaving the country, while of course if you are illegal, fine no problem.

    There is a definite agenda here, and it is has nothing to do with terrorists that much is for sure.

    -Hack.

  • encouraging truck drivers to join their First Observer Highway Security Program an[d] report anything suspicious that they see to authorities.

    "We're calling it, the Knightwatch."

    "Be a Government Informer. Betray Your Family & Friends. Fabulous Prizes to be Won"?

  • Welcome to the Korporate States of Amerika.

  • by HTH NE1 (675604) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @08:07PM (#37785608)

    Last I checked, Tennessee was further than 100 miles from the national border [aclu.org].

    Or are they including foreign embassies and Native American territories in the US as right-to-search borders now? And of the former, I don't just mean static buildings but also ambassadorial mobile vehicles. Want to search without a warrant? Invite a foreign ambassador to visit a nearby county.

    • by corbettw (214229)

      If you're within 100 miles of an airport with an international terminal and customs, then you're within 100 miles of the "border". I've built a map using Google showing these radii, for those interested.

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/7877280@N05/6266115249/in/photostream [flickr.com]

      So it's not the majority of the country, but it's a big chunk of it. And all of this land falls under the TSA's direction. Welcome to your shiny new police state.

  • by NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) on Thursday October 20, 2011 @08:26PM (#37785772)
    Could anyone think of a better way to defeat an omnipotent enemy than causing it to go Stasi on itself?

    See http://www.wired.com/politics/security/magazine/16-02/ff_stasi [wired.com]

    As we say, Stasi "is TSA." Anagram-wise.

You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.

Working...