Through out my blog posts on politics there may be several conspicuous philosophical themes that would be evident to any avid reader of my blog. The first would be how options are a significant byproduct of freedom. The second and more pertinent to this specific blog entry would be the balance between freedom and safety. I postulate that the more freedom you have, in a correlating fashion, you sacrifice safety. A great example would of this concept would be the risk to rewards of being self-employed. My stance is that safety cannot be guaranteed, so would rather take a chance have a greater autonomy. While many Americans l feel have the tendency to trade their freedom for the illusion of safety and security which is certainly a dangerous proposition for any free society. Creating the sense of safety and security generally entails government involvement. Typically, in the form of legislation that strengthens the authority of the state and the expanse of its reach. While many may question what is so treacherous about expanding governmental authority, to me it is evident that it increases the probability of abuse. Such abuse could potentially encompass violating revered rights such as those granted in the Constitution. However, when you exploit nationalism and the illusion of safety against people to swindle them out of their rights, you can often yield successful results. The most pristine example that should come to anyone’s mind was the plethora of unconstitutional regulations and laws that came to fruition after September 11th. Few questioned these attacks against our liberty at the time and most Americans chose to passively accept these egregious encroachments upon our freedoms.
Sixteen going on Seventeen years later the authoritative byproducts of the War-on-terrorism era of American politics is still extremely prevalent. No where more so than at any airport here in the United States of America. Every year millions of Americans who travel via plane capitulate their fourth amendment rights for the illusion of safety. With the holiday season in for swing, I know that more Americans will be traveling than typical to visit with friends, family, etc. While that is certainly a positive, that also means that more Americans will be subjected to unjustified searches and other invasive parameters to comply with TSA regulations. Personally, I am sick of these pointless and invasive regulations. When it comes right down to it I personally would rather assume the highly unlikely risk of being killed in an act of terrorism than to be molested by a TSA even after complying with these absurd regulations. Yes, I do completely empty my pockets every single time. Please keep in mind you are 35, 079 times more apt to due from heart disease than a terrorist attack. Personally, with odds like that, I believe that it really should be a real eye opener to most Americans. You essentially exchanged your Fourth Amendment rights for no significant increase in your personal safety. You essentially sold these rights due to disingenuous rhetoric and carefully crafted propaganda. There is nothing patriotic about making a mockery out of the Constitution and there is certainly nothing patriotic to exploit the death of American citizens as an excuse the increase the power of the government.
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.
Even with all of the regulations and authority granted to the TSA, the overall effectiveness is questionable. In November of 2017 the department of homeland security assessed current TSA procedures and protocol. It was reported that the TSA only had a 20 percent success rate in identifying potential threats. It has been noted that poor procedures and performance on the behalf the TSA was a significant contributor to the subpar results. These dismal results only a mere improvement from recent assessments. When the TSA was evaluated two years ago , ther was a 95 percent failure rate when it came to detecting potential threats. These poor results come in tandem with the TSA looking to implement the use of 3D scanners for baggage. Two airports are already using such equipment and these scanners will be in Airports nationwide by 2018.
Many may see this failure to identify potential risks by the TSA as rationale for increasing power to the agency and to enact more regulations. Personally, I couldn’t disagree more. As I mentioned previously the odds of an American citizen being killed in an act of terrorism is significantly low. Also, even with the myriad of invasive procedures and policies the TSA is greatly inept at curtailing the potential for such an occurrence from transpiring. So if the probability of the risk is low and the only recourse with have against it is inefficient, why continue to support such policies?
If these policies are ineffective and the risk is low, we are merely creating a false sense of security for an improbable threat. An improbable threat that is magnified by the misrepresented by our mainstream media, government, Amy our elected representatives. It is boardeline delusional to and potentially dishonest to keep restoring the truth in this manner. No one should be nearly sexually assaulted at the airport by a poorly trained government agent due to a distortion of the salient truth. That is that none of these invasive policies are making anyone safer. If anything it is more detrimental. Whether it is the frustration and humiliation caused by such policies or just the plan fact none of it is Constitutional. Passive acceptance of such policies is merely giving permission to relinquish your right to responsible privacy. As a society the more permissive we’re are to such Consitutional violations, the more we erode the principles that give us the “freedom” we have today. The more permissive we are towards such authoritative over reach the more invasive regulations that will be enacted. The whole concept of the “slippery-slope” in regards to the violation of our rights should not be under estimated. Soon as you open Pandora’s box it is very difficult to close it.