[QKRTHNU]

I just recently returned from vacation.

When I left home the threat level was "High". Upon returning it was back down to "Elevated".

There was one main difference that I noticed between the two threat levels and the difference made me extremely upset.
When I arrived at the airport for my departure all traffic was being diverted into a security checkpoint. At this checkpoint you were told that your car had to be searched and your trunk would need to be opened.

Is this legal? Search without warrant or even any probable cause.:mad:

Even traffic that was just looping around the airport waiting to pick someone up (Since you're no longer allowed to stop and wait) was searched EVERY TIME they went around.

I started to object to the whole affair. When I was told that my car HAD to be searched I informed the Person in Uniform that it absolutely did not. I asked if he had ever read the 4th amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. He answered "No probably not". :rolleyes:

I desired to sit there and cause a huge scene but my Wife didn't want to get arrested and popped the trunk while I was busy arguing. Kind of made me mad but it was probably best done while she’s not with me anyway.

Am I right to be furious about this? Or is there some reason I should be subject to a vehicle search while driving on Airport property?

[Kinsman]

Just have a look at the "patriot act" or any of the "homeland security" proclamations and then just forget that ol' constitution.

[buzz_knox]

Or is there some reason I should be subject to a vehicle search while driving on Airport property?

Yes, if you want to avail yourself of the airline's services, then you agree to be searched. 4th Amendment doesn't apply to consentual searches unless the limits of said consent are violated.

[CMichael]

I can understand the scare of a suicide bomber with a bomb in the trunk at an airport.

We are going through dangerous times. I think that you consider that these people are just trying to protect the public and aren't involved in some devious plot.

[nsf003]

Yep, and the NAZIs were just trying to protect the public from the jews.:rolleyes: They certainly weren't involved in a some sort of devious plot.:p

I'm not giving up my Constitutional rights because some sheeple are scared and we are going through a dangerous time. Freedom is dangerous.

nsf

[pdog]

Does driving through to pick someone up mean your are availling yourself of there services? Is the airport public or private? At what point do I allow them to consent to being searched when I by the ticket or cross the property boundary. Seems fishy to me but I am not a lawyer. Can they search my house after I buy a ticket?

[Lone_Gunman]

I am not sure you have a Constitutional right to use the airport.

Prior to 9/11 did you also object to having your carry on luggage x-rayed? Did you object to walking through a metal detector.

[nsf003]

I'm not referring to the airport. I'm mostly talking about the random vehicle searches alongside the road or when you want to cross a bridge. Or if you happen to own a white van.:uhoh:

nsf

[DeltaElite]

Well if properly pre-informed, you are entering private property and the 4th may not apply.
I dunno for sure, I flew once in the decade prior to 9/11 and haven't since.
If I was so deeply concerned about having my vehicle or myself searched, I just wouldn't go to that place.
FWIW, I find the "precautions" being taken to be ineffective and a bandaid to appease the masses, instead of actual security measures that would prove effective.

[seeker_two]

Well if properly pre-informed, you are entering private property and the 4th may not apply.

I believe that most airports are built & maintained w/ PUBLIC monies....

Prior to 9/11 did you also object to having your carry on luggage x-rayed? Did you object to walking through a metal detector.

Slippery slope, ain't it...:scrutiny:

[Lone_Gunman]

seeker_two, that is exactly my point.

Philosophically there is no difference in having your carry on bag x-rayed before boarding a plane, and having your car searched before parking at the airport.

The slippery slope ends in the abyss.

[DeltaElite]

I believe that most airports are built & maintained w/ PUBLIC monies....

Agreed, but they still have private property rights, at least that is what I am told. :scrutiny:

No one other than cops can carry in my station and anyone who wants to come in is subject to a search, but the station is a public building paid for by tax money.

I honestly don't know the answer, but I do know that no one comes into my station without being searched. Seems people want to kill us for some reason. ;)

[Lone_Gunman]

Delta Elite:

The policy though of searching everyone who enters your station is fundamentally flawed.

What you really should want to accomplish is to detect people who are carrying illegally. They are much more likely to be a threat than a legal ccw holder who has had a background check, fingerprints, etc.

What do you do when someone with a valid ccw comes in? Do you make him go outside and put his gun in his car, where it can easily be stolen?

[DeltaElite]

Lone_Gunman,
Nope we hold it for them. State law requires us to store it until they are ready to leave, so we do. Oddly enough, we don't suffer car busts often in front of the police station. ;)

If you search one, you have to search all, since you will be accused of profiling unless you search all. So thanks to the lawyers who have helped ruin this country, we search all, to avoid a perception of bias.
Actually, just recently we got metal detectors installed at the entrance of all stations, so that makes it much easier to "search" without having to touch people. People can be icky. :D

As for anyone I don't know being trustworthy......
I responded to the triple homicide and suicide of a CCW holder at our nursing school last November, so the concept of trusting somone in my station with a gun that I don't know, with a permit or not is not a good concept.
Heck, that Jersey cop shot his girlfriend with two cops present in Jersey City.
We have had three cops commit suicide in the past 18 months, one was a homicide suicide.
I am not sure I trust anyone with a gun anymore, unless I know them well.

[QKRTHNU]

Like I mentioned in the original post, this search was not just people who were flying that day, it was any vehicle that wanted to drive through the lot, no matter what the reason.

Also, when you're in the airport they have probable cause to search you if you walk through the metal detector and set it off. There was no reason to search any of the cars going through the lot.

Does anyone know for sure how airports are owned & funded? I know the one here has a board of directors. It was originally built by the military and then handed over to the community when they didn't need exclusive use anymore. But I'm not sure if its now considered public or private property.

[Lone_Gunman]

Delta Elite,

Maybe the policemen in your station should have their guns stored until they leave also, then?

Whats fair for the goose is fair for the gander.

There is a zero chance I will kill a policeman, but I dont think the converse is true.

The same concerns you have about citizenry in general, I have about the police in particular.

[DeltaElite]

Lone_Gunman,
I thought I expressed my concerns for anyone I don't know with a gun. ;)

Sorry you don't like the idea of being disarmed in my station, but that's the reality of coming into my station.

Just what do you do that makes you think a cop is gonna kill you?
I think you are more paranoid than I, and that is rare. :D

[labgrade]

Oh my!

Several issues to address here.

" 'Well if properly pre-informed, you are entering private property and the 4th may not apply,' & 'I believe that most airports are built & maintained w/ PUBLIC monies.... ' "

That's the real rub isn't it? That public/private patnership that entails we must pay for it through tax dollars ( = public), while they're maintaining it's a private entity (which excludes all rights through the "private property" rights aspect).

Catch-A 22, folks.

You pay (in dollars to support = public) & you pay (in rights lost = private) due to its private/public ownership.

I really couldn't bring the thought to bear on TFL, but this seems to be THE best example to date.

You pay & you lose - in every aspect due to the "policy handshake."

DIA (Denver's airport) has signs easily 3 miles out that says you're entering into "fed-controlled property" ..... "subject to search, yada." (but they'e not allowed - but, through the "private" aspec," they are.) - even though CO statutes explicity allow CCW through any entity - & of course refused by Fed-level laws. (just sheesh!)

'Course, it's perfectly legal to possess firearms, CCW, etc. well withing this zone - long as you don't cross the 'secure area."

Still, the "security folk" have no idea what the law is & you'll likely be jacked well-pre-close to that (already defined) zone.

The 4th has no bearing any longer anywhere close to an airport - consider it just a line, drawn in the sand, to further depive you of stuff down the line.

Just most curious, all told .....

[Open Carry]

I flew from Phoenix during the high alert. Seems the airport was unhappy with having to pay for the manpower for the check point so they just gave up. All the cones and lights were in place, but there was no one around. And I was all ready to put up a fuss.

[tyme]

What you really should want to accomplish is to detect people who are carrying illegally. They are much more likely to be a threat than a legal ccw holder who has had a background check, fingerprints, etc.I've had a background check and fingerprints taken, but I haven't applied for a ccw yet. Do I get a consolation prize since I'm "much more likely to be a threat?" :)

Just wait until they start using mm-wave radar everywhere. :what: Then all your dangerous fellow citizens who carry illegally can join all the equally dangerous people already in jail for marijuana possession. But it may make society safer, so don't feel bad. Those rapscallions had it coming.

[Thumper]

Whats fair for the goose is fair for the gander.

Most of my closest circle of friends are cops. Unfortunately, I've never met a cop who really believed the goose/gander deal.

They truly believe that different rules apply. Do any po po's here disagree? If so, why?

[hammer4nc]

The fourth amendment protection from warrantless searches, relative to automobiles, was eviscerated prior to 9/11, wasn't it? DUI checkpoints were declared constitutional, as long as they were random, not overly inconvenient (undefined), and justified by an overriding interest in public safety. What started out as drunk driving has been expanded to include seatbelts and child safety seats...puny justification, when compared to fighting terrorists, and any judge would agree!

So, debating the issue based on issues like airport property ownership, is putting too fine a point on it, IMO. This battle has been lost as a matter of settled law. Your papers please, and pop the trunk...

(Though I might not consent to a search, if I encountered such a situation, and would applaud anyone else who refused... Would make for a good thread in legal/political!)

[labgrade]

Well before, hammer - no argument here.