Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Security pat-downs illegal

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Black Caesar
    replied
    Er guys, a higher court just ruled that pat downs are NOT unconstitutional.

    The Tampa Case

    A Similar more recent case in Seattle

    The Seattle case is of course in a differant federal district, but the ruling was just about the same. In the Tampa case it just means the lower court gets to do it all over again....

    Leave a comment:


  • Andy Taylor
    replied
    They are looking for explosives in the shoes, not metal. Or I should say in addition to metal items such as knives, guns, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • ddog
    replied
    Originally posted by Andy Taylor View Post
    A lot of things will show up on a pat down that get missed by metal detectors because, well, they aren't metal. A nylon tent stake, for example.
    Airport detectors seem to pick up any type of plastic as well when turned up real high. Due to the quality and support of steel toe boots now, I can just point down to my toes in a courthouse, and they wand and wave me on. Airport security however seem to enjoy making everyone take their shoes off, which is no easy task for laced up steel toe boots. Sometimes, I think just the plastic laces on shoe strings set off airport detectors.

    Leave a comment:


  • Andy Taylor
    replied
    A lot of things will show up on a pat down that get missed by metal detectors because, well, they aren't metal. A nylon tent stake, for example.

    Leave a comment:


  • tattedupboy
    replied
    If this ruling holds up, then I think the next best thing would be metal detectors, which accomplish the same purpose as pat downs, but are not nearly as invasive.

    Leave a comment:


  • SecTrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by N. A. Corbier View Post
    Supposedly, the government violates the 4th amendment when they demand this. Tampa Stadium is government funded.
    I'm not sure how this is relevant. Even if TS were *entirely* government-owned, for instance, how would the situation differ from courthouses and other government buildings, where people are definitely subject both to wanding/metal detection and, if the officers reasonably believe it's necessary, to patdowns as well, all being done as a condition for entry.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maelstrom
    replied
    Okay, so the Stadium is Government funded... fully funded? who does the proceeds of events held there go to?

    If the stadium is hired/rented out to event organisers then surely those organisers have the power to make security searches a condition of entry (offer), because if the preverbial hit the fan it would be the organisers which would have the liability problem...

    FWIW we don't do pat downs, just wanding and bag inspections (with consent)... the only possible exception is when you have more than reasonable grounds to suspect someone's carrying a concealed weapon (and has threaten you with same), the slippery slope is the definition of 'reasonable'

    Leave a comment:


  • N. A. Corbier
    replied
    Originally posted by Maelstrom View Post
    Aren't security searches a condition of entry to paid entry venues? naturally the public have the right to refuse the search, but in doing so they negate possibility of entry, or at least that would be my understanding...
    Supposedly, the government violates the 4th amendment when they demand this. Tampa Stadium is government funded.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maelstrom
    replied
    Originally posted by BHR Lawson View Post
    Im very suprised about this ruling as well. Someone was saying to me that sometimes arenas, convention centers, public gathering areas, etc... are considered public domain and you have the right to come and go without your privacy being breached.
    Aren't security searches a condition of entry to paid entry venues? naturally the public have the right to refuse the search, but in doing so they negate possibility of entry, or at least that would be my understanding...

    Leave a comment:


  • ddog
    replied
    Do like Airport security now:

    1. wand their privates, and

    2. make them take their shoes off. Don't touch or even look at their shoes, but make them stand in their socks: just long enough to piss them off and back the waiting line up another 50 passengers
    Last edited by ddog; 08-02-2007, 06:58 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • UtahProtectionForce
    replied
    my understanding is this, if it is written on a ticket being sold, or poster adherd to a building that you maybe subject to pat-downs then no it aint illegal i think it depends of your state. like in utah you can consfiscate weapons and such and or illegal drugs of concert goers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hank1
    replied
    I thought I heard on 970 WFLA recently that pat-downs were not unconstitutional as of the last ruling. It seems I recall this about 3 weeks ago. However, there is another appeal. I could be wrong though.....

    Be safe,

    Hank

    Leave a comment:


  • aka Bull
    replied
    Originally posted by Wackenhut Lawson
    Chances are the Department of Homeland Security didn't put out an announcement saying that street has a hightened risk of terrorism. They did; however; tell that to the NFL for their games.
    Well, they really didn't in a specific.

    Here is a link to the judge's 26 page ruling


    Also, it appears, after my reading of this, that this is the court's ruling on the issue of the injuction brought up from the state court when the case was transferred to the federal courts. The judge was bound to review that injuction (as court rules dictate) to determine if it was to become a ruling of the federal district court.

    I found it an interesting read. It gives more light to the slim media reports on the injuction.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lawson
    replied
    Originally posted by aka Bull
    Police Department: "We're stopping everyone walking down the street and searching them for weapons to prevent terrorism in our downtown."
    Chances are the Department of Homeland Security didn't put out an announcement saying that street has a hightened risk of terrorism. They did; however; tell that to the NFL for their games.

    Leave a comment:


  • aka Bull
    replied
    Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
    "We're searching all these bags in the subway to look for terrorists."

    Done.
    True Nathan. But a bag is not a body.

    "No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person."
    Chief Justice Earl Warren (1968)

    as quoted in the article in my earlier post.

    Leave a comment:

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X