funjumper101 15 #1 January 20, 2009 In-flight confrontations can lead to terrorism charges. At least 200 passengers have been convicted of felonies under the Patriot Act, often for behavior involving raised voices and profanity. Some experts say airlines are misusing the law. Full Story >>> http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-airline-felonies20-2009jan20,0,5468299.story I think that it is 100% wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #2 January 20, 2009 No, it's not. In the case detailed in the link you posted, the woman should have only been taken off the flight. She earned that by throwing the can and using profanity towards the attendent. She obviously couldn't control her kids or her temper. We also don't know the other side of her story. She may well have physically threatened the attendent.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Armour666 0 #3 January 20, 2009 that may be the case and it would be assault but not terrorismSO this one time at band camp..... "Of all the things I've lost I miss my mind the most." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #4 January 20, 2009 Quotethat may be the case and it would be assault but not terrorism Agreed. That is my assumption.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rookie120 0 #5 January 20, 2009 Not at all. Some carriers or maybe it's the flight attendents who are gun shy and abusing what the law was trying to accomplish. Most of these people should be escorted off the plane once it lands at it's destination and told to find another carrier to fly on from now on. End of story.If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #6 January 20, 2009 This the main problem of the entire Patriot Act. It gives carte blanche to the assholes and control freaks who simply can't tolerate a ripple in their orderly little routines - while doing NOTHING to make any of us a whit safer. What surprises the shit out of me is that a jury convicted this woman at all. Juries are not intended to rubber stamp authoritarian policies. It is our duty as citizens to accept jury duty so we can deliver a loud "Fuck no !" when cases like this arise. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,434 #7 January 20, 2009 Who would have thought that an overrreaching law that gave government far more power to prosecute people could ever be abused? No one could have foreseen this unexpected turn of events! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #8 January 20, 2009 Such was the state of our country. Hopefully sanity will return as the fringe right supporters who were damning anyone but them selves as being unpatriotic will go and play with their local friendly militias and stay out of the collective conscience for a hundred years or so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #9 January 20, 2009 Most of what I would have said, all of you have already said. I can see I've trained all of you well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #10 January 21, 2009 QuoteIn-flight confrontations can lead to terrorism charges. At least 200 passengers have been convicted of felonies under the Patriot Act, often for behavior involving raised voices and profanity. Some experts say airlines are misusing the law. Full Story >>> http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-airline-felonies20-2009jan20,0,5468299.story I think that it is 100% wrong. It appears to be a 100% correct use of the law. QuoteWithin two months of the attacks, Congress passed the Patriot Act, a sweeping attempt to improve the nation's defenses against international terrorism. It included broad new powers for law enforcement in such areas as electronic surveillance, money laundering and search warrants. Included were two key provisions on airline security. The first defined disruptive behavior as a terrorist act, reflecting the seismic shift in airline security. The second broadened the existing criminal law so that any attempt or conspiracy to interfere with a flight crew became a felony -- a change that allowed flight personnel to act against suspicious passengers even if they hadn't begun an actual assault. The law gave flight personnel enormous latitude in determining what precisely posed a potential threat or disruption, and judging by some cases, there is no clear standard. I'll repeat the first few words: QuoteWithin two months of the attacks, Congress passed the Patriot Act, a sweeping attempt to improve the nation's defenses against international terrorism. So Congress hastily wrote a law. The POTUS signed it. It was SOOOO broad in its definition that any allegedly disruptive activity was now defined as terrorism. It's NOT a misuse of the law. The law says what it says. It's actually that group of assholes up on Capitol Hill and the POTUS who created a law that can be so used or abused. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #11 January 21, 2009 QuoteSuch was the state of our country. Hopefully sanity will return as the fringe right supporters who were damning anyone but them selves as being unpatriotic will go and play with their local friendly militias and stay out of the collective conscience for a hundred years or so. Hate to break it to you, but Obama will keep the Patriot Act."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #12 January 21, 2009 Quotethat may be the case and it would be assault but not terrorism Actually, it is "terrorism" under this dumb-ass law. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #13 January 21, 2009 QuoteSuch was the state of our country. Hopefully sanity will return as the fringe right supporters who were damning anyone but them selves as being unpatriotic will go and play with their local friendly militias and stay out of the collective conscience for a hundred years or so. Does that parrot you have on your shoulder ever get tired?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #14 January 21, 2009 No she especially likes to bite little mens NUTZ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #15 January 21, 2009 Quote Hate to break it to you, but Obama will keep the Patriot Act. The President has no power to NOT keep it. As long as it's not declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court, an act of Congress - which is what the Patriot Act is - can only be repealed by another act of Congress. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #16 January 21, 2009 QuoteQuote Hate to break it to you, but Obama will keep the Patriot Act. The President has no power to NOT keep it. As long as it's not declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court, an act of Congress - which is what the Patriot Act is - can only be repealed by another act of Congress. Restated then, Obama will not ask congres to repeal it."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #17 January 21, 2009 Why would he? When was the last time a POTUS said, "You know, I really should have this kind of authority. I ask Congress to strip me of this power." My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #18 January 21, 2009 QuoteWhy would he? When was the last time a POTUS said, "You know, I really should have this kind of authority. I ask Congress to strip me of this power." Exactly"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #19 January 21, 2009 QuoteIt gives carte blanche to the assholes and control freaks who simply can't tolerate a ripple in their orderly little routines - while doing NOTHING to make any of us a whit safer. Well said - and applicable to most laws. QuoteWhat surprises the shit out of me is that a jury convicted this woman at all. Juries are not intended to rubber stamp authoritarian policies. It is our duty as citizens to accept jury duty so we can deliver a loud "Fuck no !" when cases like this arise. Unfortunately, with "instruction from the bench" and similar activities, along with the fact that fewer and fewer people are aware of jury nullification, there's more and more results like this.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #20 January 21, 2009 QuoteNo she especially likes to bite little mens NUTZ Glad I'm tall then.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
