Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Another story of abuse of a disabled passenger

Another story of abuse of a disabled passenger

Old Sep 27, 2016, 9:22 am
  #106  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,236
I'm in a similar situation. I get selected for the NoS more often than not. I'm physically incapable of assuming and holding the position. I get really tired of moat dragons either trying to tell how safe the NoS is (um, it doesn't matter how safe it is, I can't raise my arm) or threatening me with an indefinite wait and a 'very thorough' grope and bag search and swab - like if it's inconvenient and threatening enough, my shoulder will magically heal itself on the spot.

If only it were that easy. I would cheerfully go through the NoS ten times a day if it meant it would magically heal my shoulder and enable me to fly without hands probing my genitals and stroking my buttocks and inserting themselves into my clothing.
chollie is offline  
Old Sep 27, 2016, 10:18 am
  #107  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by chollie
I'm in a similar situation. I get selected for the NoS more often than not. I'm physically incapable of assuming and holding the position. I get really tired of moat dragons either trying to tell how safe the NoS is (um, it doesn't matter how safe it is, I can't raise my arm) or threatening me with an indefinite wait and a 'very thorough' grope and bag search and swab - like if it's inconvenient and threatening enough, my shoulder will magically heal itself on the spot.

If only it were that easy. I would cheerfully go through the NoS ten times a day if it meant it would magically heal my shoulder and enable me to fly without hands probing my genitals and stroking my buttocks and inserting themselves into my clothing.
Have you signed up for Pre Check? I think in a situation like yours Pre Check makes sense even if the whole concept is flawed.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Sep 27, 2016, 11:08 am
  #108  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,236
Nearly half my flying is out of PHX and Pre is rarely available when I'm flying.

My home airport is nearly as bad.

I don't buy lottery tickets or play poker. Spending $85 on the off-chance that I MAY get Pre isn't worth it.
chollie is offline  
Old Sep 27, 2016, 3:18 pm
  #109  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Sai, why aren't these federal filings. I don't understand why any legal complaint against TSA wouldn't be a federal matter.
They are federal filings. The liquids lawsuit is filed in N.D. CA.

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) requires alleging a state tort claim according to the laws of the state in which the injury occurred. 42 USC 1983 and Bivens require alleging either a state tort (in certain respects) or a constitutional tort.

And there are airport police involved in at least one instance. Those come under both state and federal law (in different aspects).

State torts, including all common law torts, include things like personal injury, false light, false imprisonment, assault, etc. Constitutional torts include things like violation of due process, unlawful search or seizure, prior restraint on freedom of speech, etc.

So, in short, it's complicated.

Originally Posted by chollie
My takeaway: new program, video, training?

- who is the provider of these products and who in TSA/DHS benefits?
TSA's Office of Civil Rights, Disability Branch is the entity that promulgates such training, through e.g. "TSO In The Know" flyers. I assume they're also the ones that would be responsible for other training changes about trans issues.

The closest I have in my existing FOIA records about trans issues are about having a screener of the same gender as you present, and not having to remove prosthetics. Nothing specifically about trans.

- a new course? How complicated is it to teach people to respect the bodies they are groping?
Where'd you see they're giving anyone a new course?

- how will the new program (cost details?) differ from all the previous consultation TSA claims to have been doing with LGBT individuals and organizations?
Ahahahahaha.
saizai is offline  
Old Sep 27, 2016, 4:58 pm
  #110  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by saizai
They are federal filings. The liquids lawsuit is filed in N.D. CA.

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) requires alleging a state tort claim according to the laws of the state in which the injury occurred. 42 USC 1983 and Bivens require alleging either a state tort (in certain respects) or a constitutional tort.

And there are airport police involved in at least one instance. Those come under both state and federal law (in different aspects).

State torts, including all common law torts, include things like personal injury, false light, false imprisonment, assault, etc. Constitutional torts include things like violation of due process, unlawful search or seizure, prior restraint on freedom of speech, etc.

So, in short, it's complicated. .
Ok, then why do state Statue of Limitations matter?
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Sep 27, 2016, 5:24 pm
  #111  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Originally Posted by saizai

Where'd you see they're giving anyone a new course?
Ms. Beck's FB post:

New courses will be added to new officer training
Note, no reference to re-training current screeners.
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Sep 28, 2016, 1:57 am
  #112  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Have you signed up for Pre Check? I think in a situation like yours Pre Check makes sense even if the whole concept is flawed.
I had Pre-check the "easy" way working for a federal agency. Unfortunately, moving to a different agency that doesn't have the deal means I lost that perk. It was nice as I didn't have to give TSA any info as it was provided by my employer.

The $85 doesn't bother me - I'd pay that. My issue is I don't want TSA having more personal info on me than they already do, and they don't need what they're asking for.
Superguy is offline  
Old Sep 28, 2016, 8:39 am
  #113  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 962
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Ok, then why do state Statue of Limitations matter?
Case law. See e.g. McSurely v. Hutchison, 823 F. 2d 1002, 1005 (6th Cir. 1987).
saizai is offline  
Old Sep 28, 2016, 10:52 am
  #114  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,236
Originally Posted by Superguy
I had Pre-check the "easy" way working for a federal agency. Unfortunately, moving to a different agency that doesn't have the deal means I lost that perk. It was nice as I didn't have to give TSA any info as it was provided by my employer.

The $85 doesn't bother me - I'd pay that. My issue is I don't want TSA having more personal info on me than they already do, and they don't need what they're asking for.
(bolding mine)

+1000

TSA regularly grants one-time Pre to pax based on nothing more than the information collected on every single pax when a ticket is purchased.

If they're already collecting/reviewing available information and consider it a trustworthy way of determining Pre eligibility, then there is absolutely no need for the background check. It's a money-grab and an information over-reach that has nothing to do with aviation security.

It's as stupid as the notion that an $85 background check means the xray operator is now magically capable of clearing LGAs and single laptops without needing to see them unpacked.

Really?

I would really like to see Congress grill Neffy on this one particular point. Neffy's going to say that every single pax is thoroughly screened. If that's the case, why is it possible to 'thoroughly screen' a laptop or LGAs inside a bag if the pax is Pre but it is not possible to screen that same unpacked bag if the pax is not Pre.

Somebody's blowing smoke.
chollie is offline  
Old Sep 28, 2016, 11:14 am
  #115  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by chollie
(bolding mine)

+1000

TSA regularly grants one-time Pre to pax based on nothing more than the information collected on every single pax when a ticket is purchased.

If they're already collecting/reviewing available information and consider it a trustworthy way of determining Pre eligibility, then there is absolutely no need for the background check. It's a money-grab and an information over-reach that has nothing to do with aviation security.

It's as stupid as the notion that an $85 background check means the xray operator is now magically capable of clearing LGAs and single laptops without needing to see them unpacked.

Really?

I would really like to see Congress grill Neffy on this one particular point. Neffy's going to say that every single pax is thoroughly screened. If that's the case, why is it possible to 'thoroughly screen' a laptop or LGAs inside a bag if the pax is Pre but it is not possible to screen that same unpacked bag if the pax is not Pre.

Somebody's blowing smoke.
Each passengers history is reviewed by TSA before a ticket is issued, they don't collect that information at that point, it has already been collected, and resides on computers all across government.

Information is already collected and available to vett 99% of all passengers.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Sep 28, 2016, 11:26 am
  #116  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,236
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Each passengers history is reviewed by TSA before a ticket is issued, they don't collect that information at that point, it has already been collected, and resides on computers all across government.

Information is already collected and available to vett 99% of all passengers.
Thanks for an important clarification. I was careless and over-simplified.

My point, of course, is that TSA, by its own actions, admits that they currently have enough information on every pax who books a ticket to clear the vast majority for Pre without a money grab and a pointless 'background check'.
chollie is offline  
Old Sep 28, 2016, 11:50 am
  #117  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by chollie
Thanks for an important clarification. I was careless and over-simplified.

My point, of course, is that TSA, by its own actions, admits that they currently have enough information on every pax who books a ticket to clear the vast majority for Pre without a money grab and a pointless 'background check'.
I understood what you were saying but wanted to clarify for our low time readers.

I fully agree that TSA has enough information to make the Pre Check call on most passengers without further action. For the unknowns offer them the chance for a background check and so forth.
Boggie Dog is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.