Jryanbass Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I agree wholeheartedly! I am not certain that our world is a better place when we lose objectivity, compassion, and liberty in the name of fear. I, for one, am willing to sacrifice a little in the statistical non-likelihood of being hijacked in favor of NOT becoming a police state in which the citizens operate mostly from fear. If this is what America is reduced to, the unlawful incarceration, strip searching, and intimidation of people without due process, then the terrorists have won! We've laid down the liberty they despise and we've done it willingly. Faith You said it SO MUCH better than I could.:iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidsHappen Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Miranda is only needed when one is questioned. If they don't ask anything there is no reason to read Miranda. It is not like you see on TV. She was questioned though. She should have been Miranda-ized and given the right to an attorney. At least that would have been the case pre- Patriot Act. Apparently now they can do pretty much anything they want under the act. :001_huh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 When they say "incidents" it means innocent people detained for no reason. And if 3 or 4 actually MADE the news, I can easily see 47 that didnt. Actually, we don't know what "incidents" refers to exactly. An incident could be as simple as any report of suspicious activity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 She was questioned though. She should have been Miranda-ized and given the right to an attorney. At least that would have been the case pre- Patriot Act. Apparently now they can do pretty much anything they want under the act. :001_huh: I believe that only applies at arrest. Technically, she was only detained as a suspect in a possible crime, which can be done for a period of time before an arrest has to be made (and yes, that is pre-Patriot Act). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidsHappen Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I understand the feelings and frustration with this incident. However, if they had really been terrorists and you would've heard the same information, but there had been a bomb found, or knives, etc...then I think we'd all be applauding the quick thinking of those on the flight who did get involved. Things are just not like they were, and sadly, mistakes are going to be made. I'd much rather them be made without anyone being killed. Sorry, I know mine is not going to be a popular comment and I do not want to argue with anyone. I do feel extremely bad for those that were detained, just as I feel extremely bad for those stressed out on the flight thinking that something disasterous is going to happen. Alison I understand that they have to investigate these sorts of things but they could have detained and questioned her legally while doing the necessary research. It's not like she was going anywhere. They could have held her for 24 hours and allowed her to contact a lawyer. As far as I can tell there was no reason for strip searching and body cavity search. If I was her I would be determining is there was any legal recourse that I could be pursing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lorrainejmc Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I haven't read all the comments but I did read the blog post of the woman who was detained. This used to happen here all the time. My husband and my brother have both been detained (not traveling at the same time) by police for questioning and background checks when entering Great Britain from N. Ireland. Their "crime"? Being young men from N. Ireland, not wearing business suits. The police would stand at the gate and pull young men out. Every flight. No tip off or suspicions needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrothead Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 (edited) She was questioned though. She should have been Miranda-ized and given the right to an attorney. At least that would have been the case pre- Patriot Act. Apparently now they can do pretty much anything they want under the act. :001_huh: I missed it. Did she specifically say she wasn't read the warning? Also you have to keep in mind that Miranda is not absolute. Furthermore, a person can be questioned without being Mirandized. Whatever that person says just isn't admissible. I got out of LE prior just prior to 9/11 so I don't know how the Patriot Act comes in to play. If someone really wants to know. This article looks fairly accurate. I only skimmed the first 2/3 though. It has info about Miranda not being absolute as related to public safety. ETA: One isn't given a right to an attorney. One has the right to an attorney. It isn't something to be given or taken away. Edited September 14, 2011 by Parrothead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrothead Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I understand that they have to investigate these sorts of things but they could have detained and questioned her legally while doing the necessary research. It's not like she was going anywhere. They could have held her for 24 hours and allowed her to contact a lawyer. As far as I can tell there was no reason for strip searching and body cavity search. If I was her I would be determining is there was any legal recourse that I could be pursing. Sure there was a reason to strip search her. And the body cavity search. The reason being nothing more than officer safety. You'd be surprised what people keep in the weirdest places. Especially women. It isn't unheard of to insert something vaginally, then insert a tampon to attempt to keep an officer from a cavity search. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msjones Posted September 15, 2011 Author Share Posted September 15, 2011 I agree wholeheartedly! I am not certain that our world is a better place when we lose objectivity, compassion, and liberty in the name of fear. I, for one, am willing to sacrifice a little in the statistical non-likelihood of being hijacked in favor of NOT becoming a police state in which the citizens operate mostly from fear. If this is what America is reduced to, the unlawful incarceration, strip searching, and intimidation of people without due process, then the terrorists have won! We've laid down the liberty they despise and we've done it willingly. Faith Applause! Applause! Encore! Encore! You said it perfectly, FaithManor, and made my online night! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msjones Posted September 15, 2011 Author Share Posted September 15, 2011 Sure there was a reason to strip search her. And the body cavity search. The reason being nothing more than officer safety. You'd be surprised what people keep in the weirdest places. Especially women. It isn't unheard of to insert something vaginally, then insert a tampon to attempt to keep an officer from a cavity search. !?!?!?! Huh? I'm hoping I'm misreading your tone here. All this woman did was sit on an airplane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidsHappen Posted September 15, 2011 Share Posted September 15, 2011 Sure there was a reason to strip search her. And the body cavity search. The reason being nothing more than officer safety. You'd be surprised what people keep in the weirdest places. Especially women. It isn't unheard of to insert something vaginally, then insert a tampon to attempt to keep an officer from a cavity search. Certainly this should be reserved for cases where they have actual probable cause though, shouldn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted September 15, 2011 Share Posted September 15, 2011 Certainly this should be reserved for cases where they have actual probable cause though, shouldn't it? :iagree: they could have locked her in a reinforced room while they did a check. The fact that there was not a bomb in my vagina would not comfort me about the strip search. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.