TSA detains official from Ron Paul group

[RoyalShock]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/06/tsa-detains-official-from-ron-paul-group/

[Maggie]

Did you listen to the recording of the “interview”?

[SubGod22]

Did you listen to the recording of the “interview”?

I'm interested to hear it when I get home.

[Maggie]

Did you listen to the recording of the “interview”?

I'm interested to hear it when I get home.

Little IQ’s exercising their authority.

[RoyalShock]

Did you listen to the recording of the “interview”?

I haven't yet.

[SB Shock]

After listening to the tape, I came to the conclusion that Steve Bierfeldt was trying to make trouble.

I have no problem with the way the TSA handled it - beside maybe they should have tazed him for the stupid repeated answer to the TSA questions of "Am I required by law to answer your questions?" Everybody has watched enough "cops" or "Hawaii Five-O" to know that "you have the right to remain silent".

[Maggie]

I disagree to an extent. I do think Bierfeldt could have diffused the situation by answering some of the basic questions; however, I support his right to question whether he is legally obligated to answer. And, with all due respect, so should you.

This issue arises all too often when you have poorly trained individuals who are used to getting their way with the general public, without question. You can have the same problem with poorly trained police officers. The TSA officer or police officer will reflexively become defensive when they perceive that their authority, which they have come to believe is absolute, is questioned – especially if he or she doesn’t know the answer to the question put to him or her.

The bottom-line, in my judgment, is this: The TSA officers should know what they are legally able to do – which is all Bierfeldt was asking. And if I had to guess, the answer to Bierfeldt’s question was in all likelihood a simple – yes.

[RoyalShock]

I was finally able to listen to about half of the audio.

The point was that he was challenging their legal authority to do what they are doing and his legal requirement to comply. Keep in mind he is part of an organization (of which I am also a member) that believe our liberties are eroding away and it's time to do something about it. He wasn't just going to fall in line if the law didn't require him to do so. But from those agent's point of view, he should do whatever they say if he has nothing to hide? Since when was the burden of proof on the detainee? And since when is cash a threat to airline passengers? What he does and where he got the money is no one's, especially the government's, business unless they have evidence the law was broken.

Clearly, those agents and officers are not accustomed to having their "authority" challenged to the point that the really didn't know what their authority was or what Bierfeldt's rights were. That isn't a good thing. Government agents and law enforcement should know what the rights are of those they are detaining. And these guys didn't have so much as a clue. And if they did, they are guilty of harassment, IMO.

The other point is that the government can pretty much target you for anything they think is suspicious (erosion of liberties and government intrusion). Now, carrying more than $50 (according to the officer) is grounds for suspicion and detention. He had done absolutely nothing wrong. Let them be suspicious of the cash all they want. It's not grounds for detention.

[BostonWu]

After listening to the tape, I came to the conclusion that Steve Bierfeldt was trying to make trouble.

I have no problem with the way the TSA handled it - beside maybe they should have tazed him for the stupid repeated answer to the TSA questions of "Am I required by law to answer your questions?" Everybody has watched enough "cops" or "Hawaii Five-O" to know that "you have the right to remain silent".

DON'T TAZE ME BRO!!!