lsugolfer

Going through JAX this morning as I do nearly every other week. Last time I went through I had to have ALL electronics out of their bags. Today the guy says "iPad's are okay in the bag". BTR requires me to take my iPad out of its bag as a laptop.

And as usual, I opted out...but instead of the agent just allowing me to do so, I got a 60 second lecture on how this machine isn't a radioactive emitting device and I can now see my photo on the NoS...

Typical TSA with no clear rules and attempting to overstep their boundaries.

Dubai Stu

Do the rules bar a brief plea to rethink your position?

flyinbob

Do the rules bar us from a brief plea to TSA clerks to rethink their choice of a career?

realjd

I've never, ever had a problem leaving my iPad in my bag. It's only true computers that TSA cares about.

BubbaLoop

Blogger Bob says netbooks can stay in bags. TSOs on the front line have screamed at me for this transgression. Consistently inconsistent.

PhoenixRev

It's no different than with a Kindle. Every airport is different and I have been told to take it out in one and leave it in another.

As for opting out, both my dentist and a friend who is a career radiologist have told me to not go through them.

Hmmm. Should I trust a dentist and a radiologist or a TSO?

bseller

+1 on all counts. I do SO wish that this mantra that "inconsistency" will help them defeat the terrorists is eventually shelved.

Dave

RichardKenner

I suspect the inconsistency is more in terms of what else is in the bag. I've never had a problem with my iPad in my bag, but there's nothing else that's fairly opaque to x-rays in the bag. If there were, your mileage may very well vary.

travelingsalesgal

I'm hit or miss re: iPad. I usually just take it out because if I don't, then they will chastise me. Of course, when I do take it out, they'll say "you don't need to take it out." There's no consistency, ever.

WillCAD

It's always sounded to me like the inconsistency is due mostly to individual TSOs not knowing the policy and assuming incorrectly that an iPad is a computer that must be removed, and to individual LTSOs telling their underlings that iPads are computers that must be removed. It may not even be bad training in some cases; TSOs may be taking it upon themselves to deviate from policy just because they don't agree with the policy.

The whole "inconsistency will help us confuse and defeat the Bad Guys" mantra is nothing more than a BS excuse to cover up the agency's inability to enforce their own policy in a consistent fashion, and I believe that most of the information that's classified as SSI is also done for the same reason - it removes the ability of the public to hold the agency accountable for miserable failure to follow their own internal policies and procedures.

RichardKenner

I really think that it's much more a question of how the bag looks in the x-ray monitor coupled with the experience of the operator than a question of "policy".

Chaos.Defined

correct....
not all have to be removed... but an obscured image may require the bag to be rerun with it separate. It's generally contingent on how you packed and how it entered the system. If all you have is a backpack with some clothes, you'll generally be fine... If you put it in with a printer, spice rack, and, books and a sack of antique door knobs, you'll have more issues keeping it in first time through. Additionally, just because it made it one time doesn't mean that it will always be interpreted the same way; every time it enters an x-ray, the contents of the bag are likely to be slightly difference in their positioning. Finally, I've worked with some TSOs who used to be electrician, or generally tech savy, their background make them more comfortable with understanding electronics in images than those without similar experience.
It's similar to the issues with "checkpoint-friendly" bags, the signage is terrible at explaining that it doesn't work if a passenger dumps all their items into the pocket with the laptop...

gojirasan

Well try to consider things from the POV of a hypothetical rational TSO. In his view the MMW NoS with ATR and publicly viewable monitors answers all the major objections to such devices. People object that they don't want to be seen naked in order to fly. With ATR only the computer sees you naked, at least in theory. People object that the machines are dangerous, but 30 Ghz millimeter waves are not known to be dangerous, particularly at low powers that don't result in any heating effects. Unlike the backscatter xray devices these devices emit no ionizing radiation. There is no evidence whatsoever that they even might be dangerous.

So you might see why he might be puzzled by your opt out. They were expecting to eliminate the vast majority of opt-outs by spending millions to accommodate our objections, but then we continue to object anyway and refuse to be imaged by the machines. So it leaves them scratching their heads and wondering why.

I do realize that some people believe that they may be dangerous despite a lack of evidence that they are. That they should first be proven safe in testing. Or that maybe they haven't really eliminated the backroom peep booths and view us naked despite the fancy ATR and the openly viewable monitor with the cartoon figure. Or that 50% or more of people are groped anyway despite taking the extra time to go through the NoS due to false positives from the ATR system. But it certainly seems logical to me that they would be puzzled by your opt out.

I for one consider the MMW ATR machines to be harmless enough not to opt out of one if selected. I would take my chances and wait to see if they tried to grope me afterwards and then just refuse the grope and go home. For those of you willing to be groped I don't quite follow the logic in refusing. To me a 50% chance of a genital grope is better than a 100% chance of a genital grope. If there is no human viewing my naked image and I am not being exposed to ionizing radiation or even powerful RF radiation then I don't have a problem with the machine per se. In my view if all the NoS machines were MMW with ATR it would be a great step forward. Obviously going back to 100% WTMD would be even better, but that would be way too rational for the powers that be.

InkUnderNails

A very good post and from a straight up rational perspective on the issues addressed I agree wholeheartedly.

There is one issue still on the table and yet to be decided. Is the requirement that I submit to a virtual inspection under my clothes or an intrusive physical rubdown a reasonable application of the administrative search doctrine?

I am more likely to not opt out of the Avatar system. I still object that it is either that or a frisk, just to get on an airplane for a day.

guflyer

Are the resolution pat-downs worse than the opt-out pat-downs though? I have read about many cases where the resolution pat-downs are worse than the regular ones and require the person to go to the back room. If this is the case, then it is worse to be part of the 50% that receives a resolution pat-down than to get a regular pat-down. I am not sure how it works for ATR though (perhaps they just give regular pat-downs to resolve it--I am not sure).