Strip search rights?
Apr 30, 2015, 4:52 pm
#46
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold, Hertz PC, National Exec
Posts: 6,736
Also, you definitely can't "ALWAYS walk away."
Apr 30, 2015, 4:55 pm
#47
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold, Hertz PC, National Exec
Posts: 6,736
So, how do you suggest CBP handle the case of someone they believe to be hiding contraband under their clothes?
Apr 30, 2015, 5:13 pm
#49
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California. USA
Posts: 1,404
I would NEVER/Ever sign anything or help them Why . Cause I dont have anything on/in my body accept fpr dignity. No way I would help them to humiliate an innocent person. not going to happen. Just a HUGE lawsuite would happen.
Apr 30, 2015, 5:23 pm
#50
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California. USA
Posts: 1,404
This is really HURTING the person. Soeically if you innocent. It is humiliating, hurtful, wrong and plainly dicussting.
I would not ever help them if I got stopped. Not sign Not speak. Just be a zoombie. Then sue. That is me.
I would not ever help them if I got stopped. Not sign Not speak. Just be a zoombie. Then sue. That is me.
Last edited by tanja; Apr 30, 2015 at 5:35 pm
Apr 30, 2015, 5:33 pm
#51
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: jfk area
Programs: AA platinum; 2MM AA, Delta Diamond, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 10,291
She was basically raped and tortured, and you want to tell her she should've consented to it? And you think "saving" $5,000 is appropriate recompense for what she went through?
If I were to approach it so coldly, I'd say that the $1.1M settlement she received from the hospital is much more satisfying. But I think that's not enough: People should have been fired and charged with assault. Hopefully, the case against CBP will lead to such action.
If I were to approach it so coldly, I'd say that the $1.1M settlement she received from the hospital is much more satisfying. But I think that's not enough: People should have been fired and charged with assault. Hopefully, the case against CBP will lead to such action.
Apr 30, 2015, 5:38 pm
#52
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California. USA
Posts: 1,404
Apr 30, 2015, 5:38 pm
#53
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: HH Diamond, Marriott Gold, IHG Gold, Hyatt something
Posts: 33,532
It's sad that such searches happen. None of my immediate family, who fly frequently, have ever been through a strip search. I have had my bags gone through when arriving in the US.
If you're acting nervous then they are much more likely to search you.
My just graduated college daughter decided it would be fun to drive to Nogales for the day last year. Alone. Coming back, she got her car searched, as she fit the profile. Luckily not strip searched, but still no fun. She didn't take it personally.
The odds of being searched are quite small. Aren't most searches done in Canada preclearance?
If you're acting nervous then they are much more likely to search you.
My just graduated college daughter decided it would be fun to drive to Nogales for the day last year. Alone. Coming back, she got her car searched, as she fit the profile. Luckily not strip searched, but still no fun. She didn't take it personally.
The odds of being searched are quite small. Aren't most searches done in Canada preclearance?
Apr 30, 2015, 5:45 pm
#54
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California. USA
Posts: 1,404
It's sad that such searches happen. None of my immediate family, who fly frequently, have ever been through a strip search. I have had my bags gone through when arriving in the US.
If you're acting nervous then they are much more likely to search you.
My just graduated college daughter decided it would be fun to drive to Nogales for the day last year. Alone. Coming back, she got her car searched, as she fit the profile. Luckily not strip searched, but still no fun. She didn't take it personally.
The odds of being searched are quite small. Aren't most searches done in Canada preclearance?
If you're acting nervous then they are much more likely to search you.
My just graduated college daughter decided it would be fun to drive to Nogales for the day last year. Alone. Coming back, she got her car searched, as she fit the profile. Luckily not strip searched, but still no fun. She didn't take it personally.
The odds of being searched are quite small. Aren't most searches done in Canada preclearance?
Apr 30, 2015, 9:13 pm
#55
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Newport Coast, CA
Posts: 498
You're absolutely incorrect in assuming I wasn't around 50 years ago. And the notion that civil rights violations are more common today than then ... hard to justify based on the facts. I suggest you read up on Kent State and the DNC convention protests. People complain today about surveillance cameras; in the old days you were likely to be shot if you didn't kiss up to The Man.
I don't know that having cameras in public areas is a bad thing; one shouldn't expect privacy while in public places, and the safety aspects strike me as a benefit. Certainly the move toward putting bodycams onto police officers is hard to argue against.
I don't know that having cameras in public areas is a bad thing; one shouldn't expect privacy while in public places, and the safety aspects strike me as a benefit. Certainly the move toward putting bodycams onto police officers is hard to argue against.
And it is attitudes like "what have you got to hide", and saying you feel "safer" with cameras watching everywhere that makes them so prevalent. Look at the intrusion into people's lives 50 years ago versus today, and imagine how things are likely to be in another 50 years. Scary.
Apr 30, 2015, 10:58 pm
#56
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 729
She was handcuffed to a table, an object was forcibly inserted into her vagina, and she was forced to defecate under observation. There was no consent. (They tried to force her consent, in fact.)
Apr 30, 2015, 11:04 pm
#57
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 729
Yeah, if drug mules are bringing cocaine across the border, they should not expect to be exempt from intrusive search.
Shame you can't go back about 50 years in time to experience what security measures used to consist of. I'm glad we no longer tolerate police brutality and Jim Crow in the USA. People who talk as though the use of imaging technology equates to rape have absolutely no perspective. And this woman cited in the 2013 (!) incident has an absolute right to compensation if there was no probable cause. But saying she was "raped and tortured" goes way over the top.
Shame you can't go back about 50 years in time to experience what security measures used to consist of. I'm glad we no longer tolerate police brutality and Jim Crow in the USA. People who talk as though the use of imaging technology equates to rape have absolutely no perspective. And this woman cited in the 2013 (!) incident has an absolute right to compensation if there was no probable cause. But saying she was "raped and tortured" goes way over the top.
May 1, 2015, 1:21 am
#58
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on the path to perdition
Programs: Delta, United
Posts: 4,782
I think the real issue here is not what the CBP can do, but how far can they carry it? CBP, can have their initial reasoning for a strip / cavity search, that bar is pretty low but to continue to more intrusive measures seems they would need to be able articulate their probable cause / reasonable suspicion. There is probably little case law on this issue.
May 1, 2015, 4:52 am
#59
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
You're absolutely incorrect in assuming I wasn't around 50 years ago. And the notion that civil rights violations are more common today than then ... hard to justify based on the facts. I suggest you read up on Kent State and the DNC convention protests. People complain today about surveillance cameras; in the old days you were likely to be shot if you didn't kiss up to The Man.
I don't know that having cameras in public areas is a bad thing; one shouldn't expect privacy while in public places, and the safety aspects strike me as a benefit. Certainly the move toward putting bodycams onto police officers is hard to argue against.
I don't know that having cameras in public areas is a bad thing; one shouldn't expect privacy while in public places, and the safety aspects strike me as a benefit. Certainly the move toward putting bodycams onto police officers is hard to argue against.
Yes, civil rights violations are much more pervasive today than 50 years ago because the entire population is being surveilled in one manner or another.
FWIW, Congress seems to be about ready to take the initial steps in pulling back on the Patriot Act.
The push for reform is the strongest demonstration yet of a decade-long shift from a singular focus on national security at the expense of civil liberties to a new balance in the post-Snowden era.
May 1, 2015, 6:31 am
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 26,287
With all that said, calling a strip search (even one that includes cavity search) "brutality" suggests to me that you really don't know what brutality is, and that you've never experienced it personally. (I'll admit that I haven't, and thank God for that.)
