|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
When the Coast Guard was transfered into the Department of Homeland Security,
so was the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Now all auxiliarists have to be fingerprinted, and if they want to volunteer as crew or for other jobs, they have to pass a security background and criminal check. I know an auxiliarist friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. Does anyone feel that the government is going a little overboard for civilian citizen volunteers? What about the auxiliarist who has been volunteering for the past 15 or 20 years? Is he or she a security threat? Maybe it is time to consider the U.S. Power Squadron and tell the USCGAUX enough is enough! I hear that 60% of the auxiliarists in my division will not submit to the fingerprinting. That's a lot of dues paying members dropping out! "Listen to the live broadcast of 'Nautical Talk Radio' with Captain Lou every Sunday afternoon from 4 - 5 (Eastern Standard Time) on the web at www.959watd.com or if you are in Boston or Cape Cod set your radio dial to 95.9FM. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
When the Coast Guard was transfered into the Department of Homeland Security,
so was the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Now all auxiliarists have to be fingerprinted, and if they want to volunteer as crew or for other jobs, they have to pass a security background and criminal check. I know an auxiliarist friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. Does anyone feel that the government is going a little overboard for civilian citizen volunteers? If the jobs for which the Auxiliary members are volunteering normally require a person to pass a background and criminal check, there's not really a problem. The Homeland Security Dept would want to make sure that a bad actor didn't get access to places ordinarily secured against public access by volunteering for the USCG Aux. I know an auxiliarist friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. Unless there are personal grooming standards that an auxiliarist agrees to upon joining the organization, that's BS. What were the circumstances of the order to cut hair? By what authority? What about the auxiliarist who has been volunteering for the past 15 or 20 years? Is he or she a security threat? Only if a registered Democrat. :-) Maybe it is time to consider the U.S. Power Squadron and tell the USCGAUX enough is enough! I hear that 60% of the auxiliarists in my division will not submit to the fingerprinting. Does anyone feel that the government is going a little overboard for civilian citizen volunteers? Reportedly, 60% of your organization does. That should say something, since these are the people closest to the situation who can make the most accurate judgment. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
Agree. But how about doing ordinary safety patrols? I am not talking about
entering restricted channels where military ships or secrets might be, and I am not talking about entering channels or buildings where nuclear power plants are located. Just ordinary patrols! My auxiliarist friend was ordered to cut his hair if he was to attend an auxiliarist seminar at the Coast Guard Academy. Otherwise, he was told he would not be welcomed to walk around the campus in uniform with the cadets. "Listen to the live broadcast of 'Nautical Talk Radio' with Captain Lou every Sunday afternoon from 4 - 5 (Eastern Standard Time) on the web at www.959watd.com or if you are in Boston or Cape Cod set your radio dial to 95.9FM. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"Capt Lou" wrote in message
... When the Coast Guard was transfered into the Department of Homeland Security, so was the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Now all auxiliarists have to be Just remember this is the same CG that let a Cuban Patrol boat tie up in Key West harbor, the people on board with loaded gun went to a bar and had a few beers before finding a cop and turning themselves in. Coast Guard didn't even know they were there. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
Hi Lou,
As a member of the AUX, I don't have a problem with background checks. My past is clean and my background pristine. I haven't even had a traffic ticket in the last 10 years. Your background is checked many times a year without you ever knowing it. Police cars simply type in your tag number and your life's history comes up. So does your bank, credit card companies, tax collector's office, and in some cases, sales persons. Believe me, your "private" stats" are not private at all. Go to the link below, and with little input info, you can find out anything about anyone. http://www.800ussearch.com/search/st...ID=1050017173& As far as fingerprints, no problem! It would not be the first time, and with bio-metrics coming into their own, likely won't be the last. Capt. Frank USCG AUX and damn proud of it. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~aartworks Capt Lou wrote: When the Coast Guard was transfered into the Department of Homeland Security, so was the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Now all auxiliarists have to be fingerprinted, and if they want to volunteer as crew or for other jobs, they have to pass a security background and criminal check. I know an auxiliarist friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. Does anyone feel that the government is going a little overboard for civilian citizen volunteers? What about the auxiliarist who has been volunteering for the past 15 or 20 years? Is he or she a security threat? Maybe it is time to consider the U.S. Power Squadron and tell the USCGAUX enough is enough! I hear that 60% of the auxiliarists in my division will not submit to the fingerprinting. That's a lot of dues paying members dropping out! "Listen to the live broadcast of 'Nautical Talk Radio' with Captain Lou every Sunday afternoon from 4 - 5 (Eastern Standard Time) on the web at www.959watd.com or if you are in Boston or Cape Cod set your radio dial to 95.9FM. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
Capt Lou wrote:
I know an auxiliarist friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. Does anyone feel that the government is going a little overboard for civilian citizen volunteers? No, not in this particular area. I will say that I've never yet heard of an Auxiliarist being nicked over a haircut. We have Auxiliarists with long hair, and full, shaggy beard. I'm thinking there may be more details to that story. ...Now all auxiliarists have to be fingerprinted, and if they want to volunteer as crew or for other jobs, they have to pass a security background and criminal check. ... ... What about the auxiliarist who has been volunteering for the past 15 or 20 years? Is he or she a security threat? The role of the Auxiliary has been evolving substantially since about '95 -- long before the precipitating terrorist attacks. The attacks and the resulting war have, naturally, served to accelerate the process, and the CG now wants the Aux to play a larger, more involved role. Those Auxiliarists working directly with the active CG on issues where security may be a concern [operational and security patrols, watchstanding, comm center, crewing on CG vessels, etc.] must be properly cleared. Long term members clearly have been no risk in the past, but all members of the integrated team must work by the same standards. We get the same scrutiny as active duty CG. Maybe it is time to consider the U.S. Power Squadron and tell the USCGAUX enough is enough! I hear that 60% of the auxiliarists in my division will not submit to the fingerprinting. That's a lot of dues paying members dropping out! Maybe so, although 60% sounds suspiciously high to me. Leaving the Auxiliary has always been an open option for Auxiliarists. There is no contract, or "term of enlistment". The CG has anticipated in their planning that a certain number of Auxiliarists will not care to be involved with background checks and other associated security issues for personal reasons. Its an unfortunate side-effect of necessary changes. These Auxiliarists always have the option of directing their efforts to traditional, non-operational CGAux activities such as teaching Public Education courses (which I also do), Vessel Safety Checks, etc. Regards, John Gaquin Flot 0502, 1NR |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
Hello John,
Most of the Aux members are already in the 60% group. I don't plan any deck crew or coxwain activities anytime soon, as I have several ruptured discs. But I am always happy to do what little I can. I am a VE and working toward an instructor certificate. I also make cupcakes and cookies for the flotilla meetings. I am hoping that surgery will correct my back injuries enough to resume a more active role soon. Greetings from 07-14-08 http://www.uscgaux.org/~0701408/ Capt. Frank, RO,USCG-A www.home.earthlink.net/~aartworks John Gaquin wrote: Capt Lou wrote: I know an auxiliarist friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. Does anyone feel that the government is going a little overboard for civilian citizen volunteers? No, not in this particular area. I will say that I've never yet heard of an Auxiliarist being nicked over a haircut. We have Auxiliarists with long hair, and full, shaggy beard. I'm thinking there may be more details to that story. ...Now all auxiliarists have to be fingerprinted, and if they want to volunteer as crew or for other jobs, they have to pass a security background and criminal check. ... ... What about the auxiliarist who has been volunteering for the past 15 or 20 years? Is he or she a security threat? The role of the Auxiliary has been evolving substantially since about '95 -- long before the precipitating terrorist attacks. The attacks and the resulting war have, naturally, served to accelerate the process, and the CG now wants the Aux to play a larger, more involved role. Those Auxiliarists working directly with the active CG on issues where security may be a concern [operational and security patrols, watchstanding, comm center, crewing on CG vessels, etc.] must be properly cleared. Long term members clearly have been no risk in the past, but all members of the integrated team must work by the same standards. We get the same scrutiny as active duty CG. Maybe it is time to consider the U.S. Power Squadron and tell the USCGAUX enough is enough! I hear that 60% of the auxiliarists in my division will not submit to the fingerprinting. That's a lot of dues paying members dropping out! Maybe so, although 60% sounds suspiciously high to me. Leaving the Auxiliary has always been an open option for Auxiliarists. There is no contract, or "term of enlistment". The CG has anticipated in their planning that a certain number of Auxiliarists will not care to be involved with background checks and other associated security issues for personal reasons. Its an unfortunate side-effect of necessary changes. These Auxiliarists always have the option of directing their efforts to traditional, non-operational CGAux activities such as teaching Public Education courses (which I also do), Vessel Safety Checks, etc. Regards, John Gaquin Flot 0502, 1NR |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"Capt Lou" wrote in message
... I know an auxiliarist friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. You're talking about the military. They need more people, so their solution is to turn away people for stupid reasons. People like to be club members. It helps them deal with the voids in their lives. Anyone is suspect if they don't wear the hat and the secret decoder ring. Never mind talent. I've read that when Intel was a young company, new hires used to walk by Andy Grove's office, peek in, and scurry off to ask older employees about that weird guy who did nothing but stare out the window for most of the day. They were told not to bother him, because although he was a bit odd, every time he spent a day staring out the window, he came up with an idea that made the company a ****load of money. But, he looked odd. Not like us. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:26:53 -0500, "JGK"
wrote: "Capt Lou" wrote in message ... When the Coast Guard was transfered into the Department of Homeland Security, so was the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Now all auxiliarists have to be Just remember this is the same CG that let a Cuban Patrol boat tie up in Key West harbor, the people on board with loaded gun went to a bar and had a few beers before finding a cop and turning themselves in. Coast Guard didn't even know they were there. ah, the simplistic ignorance of people who expect perfection in all things. betcha HE'S never made a single mistake in HIS life... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message news:KkhNb.519 You're talking about the military. They need more people, so their solution snip disregard ignorant rant. I've read that when Intel was a young company, new hires used to walk by Andy Grove's office, peek in, and scurry off to ask older employees about When Intel was a young company, there weren't any older employees. Their corporate portrait looked like a cast photo from "Revenge of the Nerds". |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
(Bob)wrote . as to the security check, we auxiliarists DO have
access to secure/secret info. those who think that, because we've volunteers, we DON'T have access, is kidding himself. Hey Aux Sparks! You're not doing your shipmates any favors with statements like that, and the active duty folks are very happy we are doing this. it's protection for them, too. Not any more, UD http://community.webtv.net/capuglyda...inUglyDansJack |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"John Gaquin" wrote in message
... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message news:KkhNb.519 You're talking about the military. They need more people, so their solution snip disregard ignorant rant. Ya think? :-) Five years ago, my neighbor's 18 year old nephew decided that more than anything, he wanted to graduate from fixing cars, something he can do blindfolded, to working on sexy fighter jets. But, he's ridiculously nearsighted, so Air Force recruiters here (Rochester) told him he couldn't join. He ended up having his congressman investigate, and found there was no such exclusion for the job the kid was hoping for. The erroneous recruiters wasted a year of the kid's life before being corrected. When I was 18, I inquired about flying jets and was told the same thing about eyesight, but at least that makes sense in the case of a pilot. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message news:RUuNb.935 ......so Air Force recruiters here (Rochester) told him he couldn't join. He ended up having his congressman investigate, and found there was no such exclusion for the job the kid was hoping for. So what you had was a couple of recruiters who didn't know their stuff in detail, which was an unfortunate occurrence for your friend's nephew. Your earlier post made it sound as if such things were established general policy among all the military services. That's not at all the same thing. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"John Gaquin" wrote in message
... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message news:RUuNb.935 ......so Air Force recruiters here (Rochester) told him he couldn't join. He ended up having his congressman investigate, and found there was no such exclusion for the job the kid was hoping for. So what you had was a couple of recruiters who didn't know their stuff in detail, which was an unfortunate occurrence for your friend's nephew. Your earlier post made it sound as if such things were established general policy among all the military services. That's not at all the same thing. Of course it's not a written policy. But, it's a major source of fodder for comedians, movie makers and quite a few former soldiers who know that the military mentality is often centered around nonsensical layers of red tape and inefficiency. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
(UglyDan®©?) wrote in message ...
(Bob)wrote . as to the security check, we auxiliarists DO have access to secure/secret info. those who think that, because we've volunteers, we DON'T have access, is kidding himself. Hey Aux Sparks! You're not doing your shipmates any favors with statements like that, and the active duty folks are very happy we are doing this. it's protection for them, too. Not any more, UD http://community.webtv.net/capuglyda...inUglyDansJack We've been annoyed several times by power squad and coast guard aux types who want to come aboard and sniff around our little boat. It is so bad at some of the places we dock that as soon as we see a fellow with a clipboard coming our way, we shout NO! |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
On 15 Jan 2004 15:42:53 -0800, (Mad
Dog Dave) wrote: (UglyDan®©?) wrote in message ... (Bob)wrote . as to the security check, we auxiliarists DO have access to secure/secret info. those who think that, because we've volunteers, we DON'T have access, is kidding himself. Hey Aux Sparks! You're not doing your shipmates any favors with statements like that, and the active duty folks are very happy we are doing this. it's protection for them, too. Not any more, UD http://community.webtv.net/capuglyda...inUglyDansJack We've been annoyed several times by power squad and coast guard aux types who want to come aboard and sniff around our little boat. It is so bad at some of the places we dock that as soon as we see a fellow with a clipboard coming our way, we shout NO! No one knows what this means. What is 'sniffing around'. USCG Aux has no law enforcement authority. We don't 'sniff around' boats since there's no authority for us to do so. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
incidentally, info on the need for secret clearance in the auxiliary
is public info at the DIRAUX website. Let me back up what wf3h is saying.... I was a Yeoman 2nd Class in the Coast Guard back in the early/mid 80's and worked for DIRAUX 9th District Eastern Region in Buffalo, NY. I admired the CG Aux and had a great time with them. They are a hardworking bunch of volunteers! They don't have any MLE authority over anyone, but they do assist in some of the CG Ops centers and help out anywhere they are needed. Bravo Zulu, USCG Aux. I miss working with you guys!! Butch Ammon YN1, USCG (Ret). |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message news:pHxNb.946 Of course it's not a written policy. But, it's a major source of fodder for comedians, movie makers and quite a few former soldiers who know that the military mentality is often centered around nonsensical layers of red tape and inefficiency. The "...military mentality...". Exactly what is that? An example of exactly the kind of bias that some people find oh, so clever and sophisticated, but aggravates the bejesus out of me. You will find as much or probably more rigidity and tunnel-vision in *any* large bureaucracy [such as the Dept. of the Interior, or Dept. HHS, for example] without nearly the corresponding skill and benefit to our society as a whole. And yet, people still love to toss out the derogatory lines about the military. Sad, really. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"John Gaquin" wrote in message
... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message news:pHxNb.946 Of course it's not a written policy. But, it's a major source of fodder for comedians, movie makers and quite a few former soldiers who know that the military mentality is often centered around nonsensical layers of red tape and inefficiency. The "...military mentality...". Exactly what is that? An example of exactly the kind of bias that some people find oh, so clever and sophisticated, but aggravates the bejesus out of me. You will find as much or probably more rigidity and tunnel-vision in *any* large bureaucracy [such as the Dept. of the Interior, or Dept. HHS, for example] without nearly the corresponding skill and benefit to our society as a whole. And yet, people still love to toss out the derogatory lines about the military. Sad, really. The "mentality" would sound like fiction if I hadn't been hearing about it from my father since I was old enough to understand it. He spent 8 years in the Navy beginning in 1941, flying a Grumman TBF Avenger (torpedo bomber). He and his cohorts used to get flak for using too much small ammo. The pilots' theory was that a little cannon fire caused Japanese ship side gunners to get rattled, which bought the TBF Avengers the 30 seconds they needed to get down nice and low and line up their gifts. The people who kept track of the ammo didn't understand what it meant to be in warrior mode. If the "mentality" exists in other government organizations, it's somewhat less meaningful because it doesn't involve human lives. There's always a place for people who are only comfortable in church committes, where the blame for mistakes is diffused. But, it has no place in the military. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
Well we all now know who/what the weak link is!
Just because you have access to the system means you have to be a braggert to the whole world about it? Most of,and I mean most of the CGA I've known are little more than Wannabe Coasties, like AUX Wannabe cops,but lack the maturity, Integrity, and physical capabilities required to be a regular, or even a reservist for that matter. But not to worry Aux Sparks, You can hold your head high, because everytime a regular closes the Comm Center door, You'll never hear the laughter from the other side. Semper Paratus, or in your case Semper Braggipuss. UD http://community.webtv.net/capuglyda...inUglyDansJack |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message news:8BGNb.1332 If the "mentality" exists in other government organizations, it's somewhat less meaningful because it doesn't involve human lives. There's always a place for people who are only comfortable in church committes, where the blame for mistakes is diffused. But, it has no place in the military. Oh, I've heard the stories, too, from my Dad, and lived the stories in my own experience from 70 to 74, but that doesn't alter the fact that it is simply human nature at work. That's the whole point -- it isn't a "military mentality", its just human nature. If you shoot up all the ammo, the guy whose job it is to hump all the ammo has to work all the more. In the office, if you take a lot of notes, the office supply person has to work more to keep your area resupplied with spiral notebooks or floppies or whatever. People entrenched in a bureaucracy almost always try to steer the activity in such a way as to minimize their workload. That, of course, conflicts with any number of other people who are trying to get something done. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
|
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 17:10:11 -0800 (PST),
(=?ISO-8859-1?Q?UglyDan=AE=A9=99?=) wrote: Well we all now know who/what the weak link is! Just because you have access to the system means you have to be a braggert to the whole world about it? Most of,and I mean most of the CGA I've known are little more than Wannabe Coasties, like AUX Wannabe cops,but lack the maturity, Integrity, and physical capabilities required to be a regular, or even a reservist for that matter. But not to worry Aux Sparks, You can hold your head high, because everytime a regular closes the Comm Center door, You'll never hear the laughter from the other side. Semper Paratus, or in your case Semper Braggipuss. UD incidentally, you might want to check this site: http://www.uscgaux.org/%7Eopr/revolution.htm where the coast guard chief director of auxiliary says: As the Chief Director, my view of a "grand" strategy is fairly straightforward. That is, to increase the capability and capacity of the Auxiliary so a to provide the right and ready volunteer forces to support the full spectrum of Coast Guard missions, with a focus on on-the- water and in-the-air operations. We have several sub-strategies to best position the Auxiliary in support the larger grand strategy. These strategies are primarily in the areas of resourcing (budget), legal issues (legislative change proposals), security (security checks and clearances), operations, and training. oh my GAWD!!! the chief director has let the cat out of the bag! the auxiliary will be involved in security operations! oh, gee. i guess now the whole coast guard is laughing...at the coast guard... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"Butch Ammon" wrote in message Bravo Zulu, USCG Aux. I miss working with you guys!! Butch Ammon YN1, USCG (Ret). And our thanks to you, too, Butch. |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"Capt Lou" wrote in message ... When the Coast Guard was transfered into the Department of Homeland Security, so was the Coast Guard Auxiliary. Now all auxiliarists have to be fingerprinted, and if they want to volunteer as crew or for other jobs, they have to pass a security background and criminal check. I know an auxiliarist friend of mine who had long hair and was told to cut it. Does anyone feel that the government is going a little overboard for civilian citizen volunteers? Absolutely not. If you're volunteering to be part of a government organization that has certain grooming standards and other rules that separate the professionals from the people who say "would you like some fries with that," then obviously you have to comply with those standards. If you don't want to comply, then you don't belong there. See ya. What about the auxiliarist who has been volunteering for the past 15 or 20 years? Is he or she a security threat? I don't know, is he/she? They probably didn't run any criminal history checks on volunteers 15 or 20 years ago, and who's to say that he/she hasn't committed a crime in the last 15 to 20 years? I don't know about you, but I think that the U.S. has been too lax on some of their security issues (evidenced by 09-11). I think I'd rather have intensive screening of ALL of our country's government employees regardless of their time in service to avoid any domestic terrorist issues. If thev've got a clean record, then they've got nothing to worry about. Maybe it is time to consider the U.S. Power Squadron and tell the USCGAUX enough is enough! I hear that 60% of the auxiliarists in my division will not submit to the fingerprinting. That's a lot of dues paying members dropping out! Hmmm. WHY won't they submit to fingerprinting? If they've got nothing to hide, what's the problem? I fingerprint people on a daily basis. You know how long it takes? About 2 minutes. Maybe there's a reason they don't want to be fingerprinted, and if that's the case, then good riddance. Being a police officer assigned to a tactical unit and a former Marine, I take security very seriously. It's about time our government did, too. -- -= swatcop =- "If it wasn't for stupid people I'd be unemployed." |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
swatcop wrote: Hmmm. WHY won't they submit to fingerprinting? If they've got nothing to hide, what's the problem? Because it's an invasion of privacy and it's humiliating. I would not be part of any organization that insisted I be fingerprinted. I fingerprint people on a daily basis. You know how long it takes? About 2 minutes. Maybe there's a reason they don't want to be fingerprinted, and if that's the case, then good riddance. heh heh maybe you feel the same way about body cavity searches. Why don't you submit to one of them, in public? After all, if you've got nothing to hide, why not? It only takes two minutes. I am sick and tired of the "if you've got nothing to hide, then you have no reason not to" line of reasoning with regard to Consitutional rights. I believe that citizens should be respected in their homes and in their persons. If the gov't cannot abide by that agreement, then we need to either rip up the Consitution once and for all (and many would say "good riddance") or else get the gov't back on the right track. DSK |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"DSK" wrote in message ... swatcop wrote: Hmmm. WHY won't they submit to fingerprinting? If they've got nothing to hide, what's the problem? Because it's an invasion of privacy and it's humiliating. I would not be part of any organization that insisted I be fingerprinted. Thank you, you've made my point for me. If you won't comply with the established rules, then you don't belong there. Oh, and as far as the humiliation aspect, I've never seen public fingerprinting. Is that something new in your neck of the woods? I fingerprint people on a daily basis. You know how long it takes? About 2 minutes. Maybe there's a reason they don't want to be fingerprinted, and if that's the case, then good riddance. heh heh maybe you feel the same way about body cavity searches. Why don't you submit to one of them, in public? After all, if you've got nothing to hide, why not? It only takes two minutes. First of all, body cavity searches will not determine if you've got a criminal history or not. Secondly, they won't establish a permanent record of an individual. Therefore, your body cavity search insult not only does not apply, it just makes you sound dumber than you obviously already are. I am sick and tired of the "if you've got nothing to hide, then you have no reason not to" line of reasoning with regard to Consitutional rights. Certain "constitutional rights" do not apply to individuals assigned the responsibility of protecting our nation. I believe that citizens should be respected in their homes and in their persons. If the gov't cannot abide by that agreement, then we need to either rip up the Consitution once and for all (and many would say "good riddance") or else get the gov't back on the right track. Again, thank you for making my point for me. The fingerprinting in question from the original post (if you bothered to read it) purtained to individuals employed by the United States Coast Guard (government position, in case you dont abla). It's got nothing to do with respecting anyone in their homes. It does, however, apply to individuals who have access to national security issues. If you are uncomfortable living in a more secure nation because we choose to screen the people who protect us, than maybe you'd be better off moving somewhere else. Irag, for example. -- -= swatcop =- "If it wasn't for stupid people I'd be unemployed." |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
swatcop wrote:
First of all, body cavity searches will not determine if you've got a criminal history or not. Secondly, they won't establish a permanent record of an individual. So, you think it would be fun to have one done on you? Great. I think there are some other newsgroup political regulars who would like to watch. Therefore, your body cavity search insult not only does not apply, it just makes you sound dumber than you obviously already are. Why does it make me sound dumb, because I am not in favor of a police state? I guess a cop would be in favor of a gov't that would allow him to do anything at all, to any citizen, anywhere... now that would be nice & secure, wouldn't it... DSK |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
(snip) The "mentality" would sound like fiction if I hadn't been hearing about it from my father since I was old enough to understand it. He spent 8 years in the Navy beginning in 1941, flying a Grumman TBF Avenger (torpedo bomber). He and his cohorts used to get flak for using too much small ammo. The pilots' theory was that a little cannon fire caused Japanese ship side gunners to get rattled, which bought the TBF Avengers the 30 seconds they needed to get down nice and low and line up their gifts. The people who kept track of the ammo didn't understand what it meant to be in warrior mode. If the "mentality" exists in other government organizations, it's somewhat less meaningful because it doesn't involve human lives. There's always a place for people who are only comfortable in church committes, where the blame for mistakes is diffused. But, it has no place in the military. So basically what you're saying is that you've never served in the military and are relying on hearsay from 1 individual to form an opinion about the entire organization? (No disrespect to your father, he's entitled to his opinions). Well, I HAVE served in the military in a U.S. Marine infantry unit. My opinion differs from yours. -- -= swatcop =- "If it wasn't for stupid people I'd be unemployed." |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
"DSK" wrote in message ... swatcop wrote: First of all, body cavity searches will not determine if you've got a criminal history or not. Secondly, they won't establish a permanent record of an individual. So, you think it would be fun to have one done on you? Great. I think there are some other newsgroup political regulars who would like to watch. Geez, I must have missed something - I don't recall mentioning anything about the pleasures of body cavity searches, only how they didn't apply to the original post that you were trying to flame. Keep going - you're sounding dumber by the minute. Therefore, your body cavity search insult not only does not apply, it just makes you sound dumber than you obviously already are. Why does it make me sound dumb, because I am not in favor of a police state? I guess a cop would be in favor of a gov't that would allow him to do anything at all, to any citizen, anywhere... now that would be nice & secure, wouldn't it... Obviously you've got a problem with reading comprehension. Here's a suggestion: go back and actually READ what I wrote. Then take a few minutes to digest it and think about what you're going to reply with before you start typing. The goal is to fabricate an intelligent response, not just flail away on the keyboard typing a response that amplifies your obviously handicapped intelligence level. -- -= swatcop =- "If it wasn't for stupid people I'd be unemployed." |
Coast Guard Auxiliary and Homeland Security
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 10:45:48 -0500, DSK wrote:
swatcop wrote: Hmmm. WHY won't they submit to fingerprinting? If they've got nothing to hide, what's the problem? Because it's an invasion of privacy and it's humiliating. I would not be part of any organization that insisted I be fingerprinted. this is a contradiction. being a member of the auxiliary is voluntary. it's not an invasion of privacy to have a background check when you're handling classified materials. do you think everyone should have this type of access? I believe that citizens should be respected in their homes and in their persons. If the gov't cannot abide by that agreement, then we need to either rip up the Consitution once and for all (and many would say "good riddance") or else get the gov't back on the right track. being a member of the auxiliary is not a right, it's a privilege. it's not unconstitutional to have a background check. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com