How far will you give up your rights in the name of security?

Considering I don't fly TSA isn't a problem. As for the cop issue. Let them strip search me. I'd own that town afterwords. Can you say L.A.W.S.U.I.T. ? Good I knew you could.

At what point do we say no more? These cops went past that point. And I'd have to read the policies/procedures to tell you whether they have overreached. If the policies/procedures are in order, then the cops need to be removed. If the policies/procedures have overreached, then they need to be rescinded, and the cops may/may not be dismissed. But one (policies/procedures) or both (policies/procedures/cops) are way out of order for innocent (until proven guilty) citizen searches.

I would say reasonable, that is searching me would be all right if I was of the same gender, wore the same clothes, same height of a suspect. Also if I were going on an airplane, wearing a burka, have a furtive look about me, or show by my actions that I am a danger, I would expect to be searched. However if I pose no danger, then all they have to do is to question me about how much I am bringing back. So go so far, but at a certain point stop. Strip searching no unless one is using the same car, and looks like the suspects.

What these officers did is not only a blatant 4th amendment violation, it was blatantly criminal. What they did was a felony. The men subjected to this would have been legally justified in physically resisting in fact, as the officers involved were operating far outside the law (yes, I can provide legal precedence). If this is allowed to stand with out consequences for the officers, we're in serious trouble.

This is ridiculous. I would refuse to be strip searched all out in the open like that. That is definitely going to far. The police officers involved knew this was wrong and disrespectful and they did it anyways. Something is not okay when it is unnecessary and in both of these cases, things that were really unnecessary were done without any regards as to how it would effect the people. An innocent person shouldn't have to be embarrassed and have to feel vulnerable and exposed like that. Innocent until proven guilty?? Sure doesn't seem so to me.

I don't know if they are doing it but if I was subjected to that, I would be making as big of a stink as I possibly could. I'd be calling the news stations and getting a lawyer. Let them try and defend their outrageous, civil rights violating actions in court. Not only should they have to pay for their misconduct with money, they should have to pay with their jobs as well. They should both be fired. There is absolutely no excuse for that kind of abuse.

Who watches the watcher-men? Viewed from Europe it comes as no surprise, Amnesty International report US police to be corrupt and brutality widespread and systematic "There is a widespread and persistent problem of police brutality across the USA. Thousands of individual complaints about police abuse are reported each year and local authorities pay out millions of dollars to victims in damages after lawsuits. Police officers have beaten and shot unresisting suspects; they have misused batons, chemical sprays and electro-shock weapons; they have injured or killed people by placing them in dangerous restraint holds." From Rights for All, a report Amnesty International Given that and your hopelessly corrupt and undemocratic electoral system, were you any other country, you would have invaded yourself under the pretext of "restoring democracy" (Yer, there's a cruel joke) Or should that be pillaging? all the best urban

The UK introduced increasingly draconian powers for the police under the last government. They even extended powers to hundreds of other organisation. Local councils used anti-terrorist laws to spy on people who they suspected of not recycling!! Fortunately many of those laws are now being repealed. But it is still the case that we are the most surveilled country in the west. Cameras everywhere. The US must resist the introduction of such laws. Of course people need to feel safe, but when it's the law enforcement agencies that they need to be protected from then something is very wrong.