You are standing in front of the airport, and you have two choices. Either you can leave and travel by some other means or not at all, or you can fulfill whatever obligations your family, job, or anything else is asking of you. There may even be serious consequences of not getting on that flight, because you miss the death of a family member, or lose your job. If you do not get on the flight, however, you can continue to live a productive free life despite the consequences. You will move on and find another job if you have to. But instead you decide to get on the flight, and hand over your bags to airport security, who you know will search the bags. You really don't even have to carry any bags with you on the flight, buy some clothes and a toothbrush when you get to your destination. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines voluntary as "proceeding from the will or from one's own choice or consent." As you said, we "clearly use different definitions of voluntary," and yours is wrong.

"With your definition of voluntary, what forms of free travel are non-voluntary?." I'm not sure if this is a serious question or not, but I think that the whole 'free' part of 'free travel' has some implications about whether or not its voluntary.

"There are psychological as well as physical violations to consider here"
My point about sueing for damages as a result of your '4th amendment rights being violated' still stands. If you feel that your rights have been violated, causing psychological damage, then let the legislative interperate the Constitution as it applies to the laws regarding airline security searches. Welcome to American Democracy.

"Your arguments about coke fly in the face of much thinking in this area. Obviously we could find all the smugglers if we just searched everybody routinely, even though we have no reason to suspect them for carrying drugs"
First of all, I don't care what the the 'thinking in this area,' says, not arresting a person for knowingly violating a federal law which the security personnel came across while performing a legal and legitimate duty is stupid and wrong. Second, I don't know why you keep implying that I am advocating searching everybody for everything. "We don't want this, however, in our society. Nor should we get it by default because we decide to search everybody for bombs." You are saying that if an Airport Security Personnel performing a completely legal and not unreasonable search of your personal possessions looking specifically for a bomb discovers that you are committing a felony, he should let it go because cocaine wasn't what he was looking for anyway. Make sure you understand that sentence, because that is exactly what you are saying, and its stupid. You only went down that path of arguement because your friend got arrested for marijuana, which you consider to be perfectly ok, even though it is a crime to possess it. Put away your shovel, and stop making that hole deeper.

If police are searching a man's house with a warrant because they suspect him for murder, and happen to find that this man is in possession of a large amount of cocaine, should they let it go? No, of course not. Allowing people to get away with illicit materials in their suitcases because they security personnel were searching for something else not only flies in the face of precedents in terms of other searches, it flies in the face of common sense. I'm sorry that I think that people who are breaking federal laws should be punished if a Federal Employee learns of it while performing legitimate duties.

As I understand it, airport security works like this. An X-Ray screening is performed on the suitcases, and the bags are searched if anything is seen that could possibly be a bomb. A lot of things have the possibility of being a bomb, everything from electronics to shaving cream, so a lot of bags are searched. So basically the Security Personnel are searching the voluntarily submitted possessions in an attempt to locate a device which could kill everyone on a plane.

Answer this: do you honestly think that the Airport Security should not search the bags they are placing airplanes, thus making it possible to detonate a bomb on said airplanes? If you follow that line of thinking, do you think that Airport Security should refrain from searching your carry-on bags, or even stop using metal detectors?