tex1989
I will repeat here again what Benjamin Franklin said:
Those who sacrifice essential liberty, to purchase temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Oh for goodness sakes. I have been hearing this for every intrusion done for safety reasons. I believe most have no effect on my personal safety, but if I choose to go to any public place I will have to agree. I am no fan of pat downs when I go to a concert, but I will endure them, especially if I want to see Rod Stewart. Or Bare Naked Ladies. I do nto thnk they make a real difference, but if it is part of the deal....I make a choice. I really feel it is an intrusion on my personal liberty but there you go.
I also put up with taking my shoes off, and going through that X-ray contraption, or whatever it is, to board a plane. Again, I think it is silly, but it is an agreement I make if I want to fly.
I have had my suitcases ruffled through even though they went through the scanner, and have had to dump my purse out.
At some point we are going to have to agree to things that are personally repugnant or choose to stay away from these events. They all infringe on my personal civil liberties. I am not ridiculing your aversion to this policy, but I am questioning the statements you continue to use to convince those of us who are okay with this policy that we are somehow lacking.
You have every right to dislike the policy, and you have every right to choose to stay elsewhere If I felt so strongly, I would do just that. I will say that quoting amendments that do not apply, or Ben's statement, which has been used in every one of my above examples, BTW, is not helpful to your cause. All this does is offend people who also have the right to disagree with you and who have been respectful about your opinions.