Airport screeners grope baby – now we’re safe

This week’s TSA outrage comes to us courtesy of checkpoint screeners at the Kansas City International Airport.

After a test on a stroller set of an explosive detection alarm,  agents proceeded to pat down an infant last Saturday.

Jacob Jester snapped a photo and posted it on his Twitter account with the following message.

“Just saw #tsa agents patting down a little baby at @KCIAirport. Pretty sure that’s extreme.”

The photo quickly went viral.

“I took the picture because I wouldn’t want that to happen to my own son. Not because I was furious, not because I was irate, not because I was gettin’ ready to throw down at the airport, but basically because what I watched is something I wouldn’t want to take place to my own son,” Jester said in an interview with Kansas City TV station KY-3.

This is the third high profile incident involving airport screening agents performing invasive pat-downs in the last several weeks. In early April, a father videotaped an agent in New Orleans running her hands all over his visibly upset daughter. He says after the search, his daughter began crying, fearing she’d done something wrong. A few weeks later, former Miss USA Susie Castillo made a tearful video after agents touched her genitalia during a pat-down. She said she came away feeling violated.


Is the Drug War Constitutional?

At the recent South Carolina Republican debate, Chris Wallace asked Ron Paul how he expected to win the votes of social conservatives by supporting the legalization of all drugs, including heroin. Certainly, that isn’t a position you will find many Republicans endorsing these days. Paul’s answer was not only the funniest moment of the event, it was also the most instructive.

Here’s the bottom line: the Federal Government does not have the authority to pass laws regarding non-violent personal habits. If such laws were to be enacted, it would have to be done at the State level.

I believe that Congressman Paul is the most qualified candidate to speak on the issue of drugs and drug legalization. First, he is a doctor. He has prescribed medication many times since his days as a flight surgeon in the Air Force. He has also testified in the past that, personally, he doesn’t think drug use and abuse is a particularly healthy lifestyle choice:

…the federal war on drugs has proven costly and ineffective, while creating terrible violent crime. But if you question policy, you are accused of being pro-drug. That is preposterous. As a physician, father, and grandfather, I abhor drugs. I just know that there is a better way — through local laws, communities, churches, and families — to combat the very serious problem of drug abuse than a massive federal-government bureaucracy.”

He simply believes it is not compatible with liberty to make criminals out of those who choose that lifestyle.

Second, Ron Paul’s record shows that he has a better grasp of the concept of Federalism and the Constitution than any other Congressman currently in office. He has earned the title Dr. No because very little legislation passes his strict Constitutional test. It’s a simple one, really: Is the proposed legislation based on powers specifically granted to the Federal Government in the U. S. Constitution? Federal drug prohibition does not pass that test.

So, what is it about the drug decriminalization that gets social conservatives so hysterical? Is Ron Paul right about the Drug Prohibition, or is he simply “smoking something?”