F.B.I. Agents Get Leeway to Push Privacy Bounds

I really don't mean to turn this into a political blog. Really. But when I see these stories about privacy rights eroding, with very few people doing anything about it, I find it alarming.

WASHINGTON — The Federal Bureau of Investigation is giving significant new powers to its roughly 14,000 agents, allowing them more leeway to search databases, go through household trash or use surveillance teams to scrutinize the lives of people who have attracted their attention.

The F.B.I. recently briefed several privacy advocates about the coming changes. Among them, Michael German, a former F.B.I. agent who is now a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, argued that it was unwise to further ease restrictions on agents’ power to use potentially intrusive techniques, especially if they lacked a firm reason to suspect someone of wrongdoing. 

Source Article.


I'm not so naive to assume that every one of these changes is terrible and they all should be done away with. Some of the may be justifiable. But I fear that there really won't be anyone looking into that's in a position to truly review the new powers being assumed. 

The High Value of Low Speech: Attorney Robert Corn-Revere Defends The Right to Offend

An excellent lecture on first amendment rights and protections, something truly unique to our nation. 

"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." ~ Voltaire

TSA Could Ban Flights From Texas If State Passes Anti-Patdown Law

Well, ok. The issue is already passed, and our legislature backed down. Which, honestly, I understand why, as our state is just trying to stay afloat right now with all of the budget issues. From the article:

"The bill clearly states that an agent is exempt from prosecution as long as a constitutionally sanctioned federal law directs them to perform the invasive, indecent groping searches-including touching breasts, sexual organs and buttocks," noted State Representative David Simpson (R-Longview), the bill's author.

"Instead of threatening to shut down flights in Texas, why doesn't the TSA just show us their statutory authority to grope or ogle our private parts?" asked Simpson.

"All that HB 1937 does is require that the TSA abide by the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution," Simpson continued. "We aren't even prohibiting the pat-downs, per se. We're just saying you can't go straight to third base. You have to have a reason-you have to have probable cause-before groping someone's sexual organs."

Aside from the face that Representative Simpson doesn't seem to understand what third base is, his heart is in the right place. The random aspect of the pat downs flies right in the face of the fourth amendment to the US constitution, and someone needs to challenge it in court. Contrary to what the DOJ would have you believe, the Supremacy clause isn't relevant in this case. What is relevant is that the TSA policies violate the US Constitution and they are just that, policies. Not law. You are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures without warrant under the fourth amendment, and I have yet to see a single TSA agent with even probable cause, much less a warrant. No, in fact, in their attempt to be 'fair' and random, they fly in the face of the Constitution. Where is the ACLU?

I kind of wish the legislature would have let this play out. There is no way the TSA would have cancelled all flights in and out of Texas. Our economy is way too big for them to actually do that before a major election. It would hurt the national economy and the current administrations facade far too severely. But oh well. We already backed down on threat of an empty, constitutionally ignorant, letter from the DOJ.

As an aside, has anyone heard of a single case (even one) where the pat downs actually caught a bad guy? Because every time I've heard of air terror being thwarted post TSA, it's been the efforts of civilians on the plane, and occasionally US Marshalls. The TSA has nothing to do with it. What have they prevented?

Business Owner Casts Reasonable Doubt on Accuracy of Speed Cameras - Washington Times

As if there wasn't any before.

Wait, so the technology isn't 100% accurate? You mean its just a money grab by your government? They would never do that, would they?

Business owner casts reasonable doubt on accuracy of speed cameras - Washington Times:

"Will Foreman has beaten the speed cameras.

Five times and counting before three different judges, the Prince George’s County business owner has used a computer and a calculation to cast reasonable doubt on the reliability of the soulless traffic enforcers.

After a judge threw out two of his tickets Wednesday, Mr. Foreman said he is confident he has exposed systemic inaccuracies in the systems that generate millions of dollars a year for town, city and county governments"

Though honestly, even all this aside, I have fewer problems with speed cameras than I do red light cameras, which have had a multitude of problems associated with them, among them increased accident rates at intersections (Study: read the abstract), and police being caught violating the traffic laws, yet no punishment being handed down for their actions.

Actually, there's a good bit of evidence that the best way to reduce accidents at intersections is simply to increased the length of the yellow light by as little as one second, reducing accidents by as much as forty percent. Yes, thats 40%! But, that doesn't generate revenue for the government, so that simple action isn't taken. In fact, some municipalities have been caught shortening yellow lights after installing red light cameras. This is your government, people.

Related Articles:

Public Health Researchers Take Closer Look at Red Light Cameras

Report Critiques Red Light Camera Research Methods

New Mexico: Study Shows Photo Enforcement Increased Accidents

Student Protests Of Teacher Layoffs And Limited Rights Yield Harsh Punishments

I have to say, I've never understood the mindset that students are somehow lesser human beings and, upon entering a school, become devoid of all civil rights. Yes, there needs to be a pecking order, and no, students shouldn't have the run of the school. But I can't count the times politicals on both sides of the aisle have trounced upon freedom of speech in schools, as if the First Amendment is somehow defunct when in the presence of state employees. (How does that logic follow? Not sure I understand.)

And I do believe that the right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances is, in fact, protected under the First Amendment. (The Amendment most commonly ignored, I think.)

Yet, when students protest harsh cuts to the schools they attend?

More protests against school budget cuts and limitations on teachers' rights are taking place across the country -- except at these rallies, attendants have backpacks and braces.High school students nationwide are standing up for their teachers by protesting or walking out of class. And some schools are threatening hardcore punishments.

From a brief article at the Huffington Post. The article continues:

And it's not just happening in Texas. In Aurora, Colo., 100 students staged a walkout earlier this month to protest layoffs.One mother who supports her daughter walking out of class told the Denver Channel that a school clerk said to her:"Ma'am, your daughter loses her civil liberties when (she) walks into Hinkley High School."

Not that I'm trying to pretend the Huffington Post gives the Bill of Rights much regard. They pick and choose which amendments suit their political needs, just like most politicians.

But that said, when did the assumption enter into the education system that students are completely devoid of Civil Rights? That is the state stripping students of their rights as guaranteed by their own Constitution's Bill of Rights. It's absurd. One can maintain an orderly and mature campus without oppressing the students. But I think, perhaps, that oppression is easier for most administrators, and the preferred method of maintaining order.

And then are we surprised when the students fall in line like sheep and are incapable of critical thought, when any original thoughts and aspirations are stomped out like disease? Cut out like a cancer? Perhaps our inability to make our schools an emulation of true society is one of their greatest weaknesses and flaws today. I wouldn't be prepared for the real world either if I lived in a fairy land of a nanny state that held my hand for eighteen years.

No, I think the problem isn't the concept of public education itself, but the way those in power tend to twist it. And by extension, the lack of effort on anyone's part to correct this flawed paradigm.

Our Eroding Civil Liberties

This article gives an excellent example of why libertarianism is a small, but slowly spreading, movement in the US. It's truly the only logical place for politics to go, what with Federal Government on a binge power grab. A government only has the right to rule so long as it has the consent of the governed, and the US Federal Government I think is rapidly losing favor in the eyes of many Americans.


Excerpt:

One of the most disturbing, which is subject to an ongoing lawsuit, involved a 21-year-old college student from Amarillo Texas. The woman was passing through security at Corpus Christi airport on May 29 2008 when she was subjected to “extended search procedures” by the TSA.

“As the TSA agent was frisking plaintiff, the agent pulled the plaintiff’s blouse completely down, exposing plaintiffs’ breasts to everyone in the area,” the lawsuit said. “As would be expected, plaintiff was extremely embarrassed and humiliated.”

I would be fascinated to know how many bad guys the TSA's screening methods has truly caught. I strongly suspect the number to be close to zero. Then compare that to the number of people they've violated, and I bet you could plot some very, very interesting graphs.


Also, another interesting editorial pushing for the outright abolishment of the TSA, which honestly, makes a lot of fiscal. Airlines have an extremely strong incentive to keep their flights safe, and if the TSA disappeared, they'd have to cover their own tails or risk losing all business. I'm willing to be the airlines would find many cheaper, more effect, less offensive security measures than the TSA, and it wouldn't waste my tax dollars. I mean, we are in incredible debt peril anyway, right? Scrap the TSA entirely. 


From the article:

Bipartisan support should be immediate.  For fiscal conservatives, it’s hard to come up with a more wasteful agency than the TSA.  For privacy advocates, eliminating an organization that requires you to choose between a nude body scan or genital groping in order to board a plane should be a no-brainer.