-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
anybody who flys from atlanta
- Thread starter mark5019
- Start date
Eeyore
Regular Member
But your honor, I definitely didn't intend to carry my firearm thru security, I was just "careless!" If that's good enough for Hilary.....
people have literally already tried this excuse in court, and it doesn't work.
utbagpiper
Banned
Kind of a big deal
I'm no expert. But my understanding is that in most cases, federal charges in federal court tends to be a bigger deal than are similar charges in State court.
In other words, this may be a case where the State has not done permit holders any favors. An inadvertent, unintentional, non-violent violation of the "No Guns through security checkpoint" law by a permit holder is now handled exclusively at the federal level, rather than likely being handled at the State level instead. Among other issues, should one draw a jail/prison sentence, the federal system provides much less flexibility in terms of parole; convicts serve a larger portion of the original sentence than they do in most State systems.
Obviously, the relatively recent (1970s) federal ban on private guns in the cabin of commercial aircraft is not only un-needed, but also counterproductive. However, so long as the federal ban remains, LACs who carry firearms are well advised to abide the law. We ought to also be well aware of where we are and not forget we have a gun.
However, violations of the airport secure area with prohibited items are treated very differently depending on what the item is. Guns are treated unduly harshly, IMO. Water bottles and other liquids are almost always just discarded with nary a thought of any charges. Violations with knives also, almost never draw any charges unless there is some evidence of deliberate attempt to violate the policy. The knife is either surrendered, or the owner is given the chance to go mail it to themselves.
But any violation with a gun results in automatic confiscation and at least a ticket/summons to appear, frequently a custodial arrest.
Charles
I'm no expert. But my understanding is that in most cases, federal charges in federal court tends to be a bigger deal than are similar charges in State court.
In other words, this may be a case where the State has not done permit holders any favors. An inadvertent, unintentional, non-violent violation of the "No Guns through security checkpoint" law by a permit holder is now handled exclusively at the federal level, rather than likely being handled at the State level instead. Among other issues, should one draw a jail/prison sentence, the federal system provides much less flexibility in terms of parole; convicts serve a larger portion of the original sentence than they do in most State systems.
Obviously, the relatively recent (1970s) federal ban on private guns in the cabin of commercial aircraft is not only un-needed, but also counterproductive. However, so long as the federal ban remains, LACs who carry firearms are well advised to abide the law. We ought to also be well aware of where we are and not forget we have a gun.
However, violations of the airport secure area with prohibited items are treated very differently depending on what the item is. Guns are treated unduly harshly, IMO. Water bottles and other liquids are almost always just discarded with nary a thought of any charges. Violations with knives also, almost never draw any charges unless there is some evidence of deliberate attempt to violate the policy. The knife is either surrendered, or the owner is given the chance to go mail it to themselves.
But any violation with a gun results in automatic confiscation and at least a ticket/summons to appear, frequently a custodial arrest.
Charles
that is because the states or individual national aerolines no longer have sovereignty over the aeroports located in their states...
quote: The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is an agency of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that has authority over the security of the traveling public in the United States. It was created as a response to the September 11, 2001 attacks. Originally part of the United States Department of Transportation, the TSA was moved to the Department of Homeland Security on March 9, 2003.
The agency's proponents, including Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, argued that only a single federal agency would better protect air travel than the private companies who operated under contract to single airlines or groups of airlines that used a given terminal facility. unquote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration
therefore, once across the nice TSA who checked a citizen's 'papers' the citizen now falls into federal jurisdiction ~ who do not give a rats behind about state's firearm statutes.
finally, many a traveler has given up and left their precious pocket knives, nail clippers, as well as nail files at their departure site.
ipse.
quote: The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is an agency of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that has authority over the security of the traveling public in the United States. It was created as a response to the September 11, 2001 attacks. Originally part of the United States Department of Transportation, the TSA was moved to the Department of Homeland Security on March 9, 2003.
The agency's proponents, including Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, argued that only a single federal agency would better protect air travel than the private companies who operated under contract to single airlines or groups of airlines that used a given terminal facility. unquote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration
therefore, once across the nice TSA who checked a citizen's 'papers' the citizen now falls into federal jurisdiction ~ who do not give a rats behind about state's firearm statutes.
finally, many a traveler has given up and left their precious pocket knives, nail clippers, as well as nail files at their departure site.
ipse.
Last edited:
davidmcbeth
Banned
Here's one (of many) major defect with TSA checkpoints at airports.
Most airports are GFZs.
So, when you get to a TSA checkpoint they are doing a CRIMINAL search, not an administrative search, which is one exception to the need for a warrant.
Many years ago, before most GFZs were in place, the courts OKed the airport searches as they were administrative in nature. But not anymore...they are searches seeking out evidence for use at a criminal trial.
As such, warrants are needed and warrants based on probable cause...
Sorry TSA, your searches are illegal. Sucks that 4th amendment huh?
And this would apply to any searches in GFZs .... not just at airports.
So an agency can search, if the need is proven (a hurdle), in places w/o GFZs as such searches meet their intended result. But one cannot search w/o a warrant in GFZs because this makes the search a criminal search.
The idiot lawmakers have specifically made it so its a crime to bring a gun into a place and yet they have handcuffed themselves by the 4th amendment to not being able to search people for such.
Most airports are GFZs.
So, when you get to a TSA checkpoint they are doing a CRIMINAL search, not an administrative search, which is one exception to the need for a warrant.
Many years ago, before most GFZs were in place, the courts OKed the airport searches as they were administrative in nature. But not anymore...they are searches seeking out evidence for use at a criminal trial.
As such, warrants are needed and warrants based on probable cause...
Sorry TSA, your searches are illegal. Sucks that 4th amendment huh?
And this would apply to any searches in GFZs .... not just at airports.
So an agency can search, if the need is proven (a hurdle), in places w/o GFZs as such searches meet their intended result. But one cannot search w/o a warrant in GFZs because this makes the search a criminal search.
The idiot lawmakers have specifically made it so its a crime to bring a gun into a place and yet they have handcuffed themselves by the 4th amendment to not being able to search people for such.
Last edited:
utbagpiper
Banned
Perhaps most. But not the public airports in Utah. Under State law, only the secure area is a GFZ. Publicly accessible areas outside the secure area are not GFZs.