You might have thought the uproar was over. But no.</p><p>First, right-wingers got upset over an eight-page report on the history of militias put together by the Missouri Highway Patrol and sent to the state&#8217;s intelligence &#8220;fusion center.&#8221; It was pretty much a high school-level backgrounder for law enforcement, but it made the mistake of generalizing that some militia members align with third-party political groups.</p><p>Third-party candidates complained. Some people jumped to the conclusion that a Ron Paul bumper sticker was a ticket to the slammer.</p><p>Apologies were made. The report was retracted.</p><p>Then word got around about how airport officials in St. Louis had detained a Ron Paul organization official.</p><p>Steve Bierfeldt, the Campaign for Liberty&#8217;s director of development, had $4,700 in cash and checks in a metal box as he headed home to the D.C. area March 29 after attending a regional conference for the organization. The money was from sales of tickets, books and other merchandise.</p><p>Transportation Security Administration officials wanted to know why he was carrying so much money.</p><p>Bierfeldt pretty much answered their questions with, &#8220;Am I required to tell you that?&#8221;</p><p>The TSA officials got their dander up. For half an hour, their back-and-forth nonconversation played out.</p><p>Like any Libertarian worth his views, Bierfeldt realized he had the perfect opportunity to create a drama from the situation, so he recorded it with his phone.</p><p>The audio has spun on YouTube, talk radio and TV as commentators muse about the state of personal freedoms and how Missouri indeed must be targeting third-party candidates.</p><p>Listening to the TSA and police officials, one thinks of Barney Fife on steroids. At one point an official asks Bierfeldt if he&#8217;s &#8220;from this planet&#8221; and if handcuffs will be necessary.</p><p>Did Bierfeldt have the right to refuse? Absolutely. He was breaking no law.</p><p>Did his curt replies make the situation worse? Absolutely.</p><p>But in a conversation later, he made the valid argument that if everyone was OK with surrendering rights for the sake of not being inconvenienced, government would routinely step too far.</p><p>Bierfeldt supports private security at airports. He favors a system in which the passenger&#8217;s discretion in choosing an airline would determine whether he or she would go along with a particular company&#8217;s security measures. That way, screenings by overzealous officials wouldn&#8217;t be an issue.</p><p>A middle ground would probably be right with most people. That and a little more gracious cooperation from everyone. Then, more significant threats to public safety and people&#8217;s rights could remain in better focus.