Rand Paul illegally detained at airport

[Reba]

Senator Rand Paul Stopped at Nashville Airport, TSA Says - Businessweek

This is a breach of the US Constitution:

"They [Congressmen] shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same"

 

[Foxrac]

That's not illegally detained and Rand Paul was just turned away by TSA because he refused to accept additional search so he can't gain the access to secure area. I'm glad that TSA is just treat politicians as regular citizens like us to have screened, also politicians do not need special treatment to skip the screen or having a cheap screen. I had additional screening at airport as well and I just accept that because I don't want miss the fly, that's part of life.

Paul was attempting to clear security to get to a flight in Nashville, Tennessee. A routine screening of the Kentucky Republican showed an anomaly and the senator refused to go through a patdown, as required by security procedures, to “resolve the alarm,” according to an e-mailed TSA statement. Paul was not detained, the agency said.

Life is UGLY so you have to accept if you want gain the access to gate area.

 

[Jiro]

It's pretty obvious that he was singled out.

 

[DeafCaroline]

Nothing in the article said anything about illegal detainment :roll:

 

[Reba]

To detain a US Congressman in his travel to and from Congress, is illegal.

 

[DeafCaroline]

So is refusing to submit to a pat down at an airport.

p.s. "Paul later went through security without incident and boarded another flight, the agency said."

 

[Reba]

According to the dictionary:

de·tain   [dih-teyn] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1. to keep from proceeding; keep waiting; delay.
2. to keep under restraint or in custody.
3. Obsolete . to keep back or withhold, as from a person.

 

[Reba]

So is refusing to submit to a pat down at an airport.

p.s. "Paul later went through security without incident and boarded another flight, the agency said."

Constitution trumps TSA procedures.

 

[Jiro]

Nothing in the article said anything about illegal detainment :roll:

Actually Reba brought up a very good point. Although he was not detained but it's a violation of constitution.

You could say they are kind of above the law to a certain degree during session and in this case, it was illegal of TSA to "temporarily" detain him for further security screening because TSA was preventing him from attending Congress.

 

[Jiro]

To detain a US Congressman in his travel to and from Congress, is illegal.

for bringing it up. I wasn't aware of this. Something new I learned today. At first, I thought it was because he was singled out just because of his relationship with Ron Paul whom no federal agencies do not like very much.

 

[DeafCaroline]

Actually Reba brought up a very good point. Although he was not detained but it's a violation of constitution.

You could say they are kind of above the law to a certain degree during session and in this case, it was illegal of TSA to "temporarily" detain him for further security screening because TSA was preventing him from attending Congress.

But he didnt get prevented. And he was the one detaining himself by refusing to a pat down.

 

[Jiro]

Airportcop- perhaps you could shed a light on this. Are you aware of this Constitutional law regarding Congressmen?

 

[DeafCaroline]

Airportcop- perhaps you could shed a light on this. Are you aware of this Constitutional law regarding Congressmen?

Isnt the bigger question here is "are congressmen exempted from airport security screening?"

 

[Tousi]

But he didnt get prevented. And he was the one detaining himself by refusing to a pat down.

You are just being obtuse/tactless/insensitive, targeting Reba just for the sake of doing so.

 

[Reba]

Think about this. Suppose any kind of law officer could prevent a Congressman from attending a vote on civil rights legislation, war declaration, impeachment proceedings, budgets, etc. That's why they are protected by the Constitution.

States also have that law for their legislators.

 

[Banjo]

Think about this. Suppose any kind of law officer could prevent a Congressman from attending a vote on civil rights legislation, war declaration, impeachment proceedings, budgets, etc. That's why they are protected by the Constitution.

States also have that law for their legislators.

What if a congressman was a sleeper cell terrorist with plans to blow up the House of Congress? What would happen? Would the security procedure change?

I was just wondering about that.

 

[Jiro]

Isnt the bigger question here is "are congressmen exempted from airport security screening?"

which brings up the point - "is he being petty about this or just making a point?"

White House is siding with TSA and White House Press Secretary Carney said “I think it is absolutely essential that we take necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe.”

one might be puzzled with that comment - "......really? Senator? may pose a security risk for air travel?" but the point is - he was "temporarily" detained (or prevented from getting on flight).... which is illegal if he was not breaking any law. Just because a security sensor went off doesn't mean he broke a law so he's federally protected from any form of detainment.

 

[Jiro]

What if a congressman was a sleeper cell terrorist with plans to blow up the House of Congress? What would happen? Would the security procedure change?

I was just wondering about that.

it would be much easier and safer to arm him with bomb in DC, prior to entering Congress.

but then... he would be going thru another security checkpoint upon entering Congress.

 

[Banjo]

it would be much easier and safer to arm him with bomb in DC, prior to entering Congress.

but then... he would be going thru another security checkpoint upon entering Congress.

People have gotten away with a lot.

 

[Jiro]

People have gotten away with a lot.

yea like a little white stash in that briefcase