Prejudice and Bigotry

It's been my experience that only libertarians truly want to end prejudice and bigotry. For only libertarians truly want you to be free.

I know plenty of people who want to end prejudice against people whom they identify with. Many conservatives want to end prejudice and bigotry against religious freedom. Many liberals I know hear even a mention of race and will let you know that you must be a racist, especially if you're a conservative.

But what I consistently find is that this defense of various cultures and beliefs only extends as far as the familiar, especially when considering the traditional (and highly flawed) left/right political spectrum.

Because you also find the conservatives who are only concerned about Christian religious freedoms, not the freedoms of other religions. And you find the liberals who look down their nose at those they consider 'uneducated', or worse yet, 'prejudiced' themselves. (No, they don't see the irony.)

Only libertarians think you have the right to believe what you want to believe, and no, we shouldn't try to legislate our beliefs onto others, save that one essential belief, liberty for all. Not for some. Not for those we like. Who we consider Christian enough. Or elite enough. Liberty for everyone, even if your beliefs are distasteful to others.

So, if you have a strong dislike for a culture that isn't your own, if you look down on others because they don't fit your mold, that's fine. But be considerate enough to think twice before you label someone else prejudiced, a racist, or a bigot. Because you probably, in some area of your life, fit into the same mold, whether you'd like to admit it or not.

TSA stands by officers after pat-down of elderly woman in Florida

It's been awhile since I've posted, as I don't abide by the 'post regularly' rule of blogging. I post when I darn well want to. But that said, I couldn't pass this up. The libertarian streak in me, as (relatively) mild as it is, was a bit too offended at this latest story.

(CNN) -- The Transportation Security Administration stood by its security officers Sunday after a Florida woman complained that her cancer-stricken, 95-year-old mother was patted down and forced to remove her adult diaper while going through security.

Reports of the incident took hold in social media, with scores of comments on the topic and reposts appearing hourly on Twitter Sunday afternoon. The TSA released a statement Sunday defending its agents' actions at the Northwest Florida Regional Airport.

"While every person and item must be screened before entering the secure boarding area, TSA works with passengers to resolve security alarms in a respectful and sensitive manner," the federal agency said. "We have reviewed the circumstances involving this screening and determined that our officers acted professionally and according to proper procedure."

Emphasis mine.

I think the point that bothers me the most is that this was the 'proper procedure'. Here's the fourth amendment for you, in case you aren't up on your constitutional law:

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.

So where was the probable cause the granted the TSA the right to ask an elderly cancer stricken woman to remove her adult diaper? Was she acting shading? Like she might blow up a plane? Did she look like the type to try to storm the cockpit? Did she have a rap sheet? Was she on a watch list or a do not fly list? Did she have a run in with security before going through the TSA checkpoint?

My suspicion is that the answer to all of those questions is no. The TSA, in its attempt to avoid a 'discrimination' accusation by minorities, has intentionally randomized their searches. This is in blatant violation of our fourth amendment. And having that little old lady remove her adult diaper did absolutely nothing to help secure that plane. There is ample precaution, and then their is blind, illogical procedure. The TSA routinely uses the second one. Someone ought to reign them in.

---

Completely unrelated, my 100th post. :)

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

Watch the Watchmen - Reason Magazine

An article written by the rational John Stossel, of whom I am rapidly becoming a bigger and bigger fan. Whole point being, there ought to be more transparency in police matters, as they are public servants and given their special position in society, the potential for abuse of powers is great.

Personally, as I go into public teaching, I realize that I in many way give up my right to privacy, at least as an educator. I forfeit my right to anonymity as soon as I'm paid at the tax payers expense. The same ought to apply to any public employee, yet some institutions manage to get a special pass. Why is that, and why is it such a problem? Stossel writes:

Watch the Watchmen - Reason Magazine:

"I believe in the right to privacy.

Yet I can think of someone who deserves very little privacy—a policeman making an arrest. Unfortunately, in some states it's a crime to make a video of a policeman doing just that. People recording police have been threatened, detained, or arrested. Some were jailed overnight.

That's wrong. Police work for the public, they're paid with tax money, and most importantly, they have tremendous power. They've got the legal right to pull guns, detain us, lock us up and, in some cases, shoot us. The potential for abuse is great. So it's a good thing that modern video cameras are now so commonplace. Any abuse of police power in a public place is likely to be recorded. Why should that be a crime in some states?"

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.

What it means to be a libertarian.

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.