Should laws apply to lawmakers?

I don’t think the metal detector thing is a “law.” I work in a public building as I work for the government. The general public who enters the building must hand over ID and go through metal detectors. I, as an employee do not. First of all, to have employees, hundreds of them, have to go through metal detectors every time they come to work, return from lunch, etc., would be ridiculous. Also, the assumption is that the employee posts no danger to their workplace, whereas the public may. The public must enter through the door where the metal detector is. The employee may enter through the garage, the basement, etc.

It is the law, @jca, at least here.
I’m not allowed to pay my taxes, visit my social security office or serve on a jury without submitting to a full metal detector search. If found in non-compliance, I have to exit the building, place the offending item in my vehicle, and submit to another search.
How is it more ridiculous for the 100’s of employees than it is for the 1,000’s of tax paying members of the public?
I’m serving on a jury and I have to turn out my pockets, while the guy in the next line over gets a pass because he’s carrying a briefcase?

But what’s the point to godhood, if one is subjected to the loathsome confinements burdening “the unwashed”?

I’m a non-smoker and the smoking thing really pisses me off.
More, even, than the Speaker having a “suite” at taxpayer expense.

@ibstubro: I don’t suspect the guy next to you gets a pass because he’s carrying a briefcase. I suspect he may get a pass if he’s carrying ID that shows he works in the building. If it upsets you, I suggest you question the police or guards who wave the employee thru, while holding up the general public and making them walk through the metal detector. Ask the policeman why it’s ok. He may have a better answer than I, as to the specifics.

Having separate laws for rulers and the ruled is a long-standing tradition of humanity.
Just remember that even the abrahamic god did not have to follow his own “you shall not kill” rule.

I don’t think he’s given a pass because he’s carrying a briefcase, @jca.
I’m saying that one rogue briefcase could be devastating and warrants checking large objects carried by anyone into a secure facility.

Unless you believe wealthy professionals are immune to going ‘bad’.

Either there is a legitimate reason for prohibiting access to the building, or there is not.
If employees have a separate entrance, then their security check should take seconds, not minutes. If millions of airline users can learn to not set off a metal detector, how is it onerous for 100’s of building workers to do so. Aren’t the checks primarily for their protection?

I’d like to give you this, but I can’t.

@ibstubro: Ask the cop in the building. I’ll ask the cop in the building I work in.

Is there anyone who thinks that laws do not apply to lawmakers? Yes they should!

All the laws should definitely apply to lawmakers

I asked the cop at work why the employees don’t have to go through metal detectors and ID check and the public does, and he said because the employees have had background check and we know who they (we) are. The public, we don’t know who they are.

I know when he checks ID through the computer, if they have a warrant, it will come up and they’re arrested.