Go Back   > > >
View Poll Results: Do you agree or disagree with the action undertaken by MKEbound?
Agree 766 75.92%
Disagree 144 14.27%
Neither agree nor disagree 75 7.43%
Not sure 24 2.38%
Voters: 1009. You may not vote on this poll

 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:07 pm   #31
Suspended
  
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 22,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKEbound
I have a couple of questions:
Could I have refused to provide my ID and/or address to the officer since I wasn't under arrest?
When asked for my ID do I have to hand it over or can I hang on to it? By giving it to the deputy, he walked of with it and I felt stuck.
First of hats off to you. I would like to shake your hand.

Now to your questions.

I think you shouldn't have to give your adress or any kind of ID. I am not a lawyer. However, if the police can make a case, that there was a basis for further investigation, I don't know what that basis would be, you probably are obligated to show your ID.

The reason for filing a report has been cited by the TSA as a reason for asking for your ID and all.

I had an experience at that ended with the NW station manager telling me that I had to co-operate. I was told I had to show my ID as they had to file a incident report. It all started when I walked through the metal detector with our passports in my shirt pocket. I was pulled aside for a secondary screening. I asked if they can pull me over even if I did not sound an alarm. I said that was stupid. from then on it turned into a power trip. The guy wanted me to hand him our passports ( my wife and kids were with me). I refused as we had already gone through immigration and customs and were going to make a connection with a domestic flight. I told him I would in no way hand him our passports. He wanted to put them through the X-ray machine. I was willing to put them in my wife's pocket book and have the pocket book go through the X-ray, but I was not about to hand our passport over to TSA for any reason, as the ID checker had already checked our IDs. He was pissed and asked me "why do you have so many passports in your pocket anyway ?" I felt like saying are you so stupid that you don't know one passport is needed for each person?", but I bit my tongue. ANother TSA employee thought it was ok to put the passports in my wife's pocketbook to be x-rayed. You can imagine the first TSA guy was pissed. He gave me a thorough secondary screening. I asked for a complain form. They handed me the form. As I was walking away, almost as a second thought they asked me for an ID. I refused to show my ID again. AT that point the TSA guy snatched the complaint form my hand. I was surrounded and was not allowed to leave. The police and the NW staiton manager was called. TSA guy was telling me they were going to recommend to NW that I was considered unsafe and that I not be allowed on their flight. The NW station manager told me it would be better form me to co-operate by answering a couple of questions. I stopped after a couple of questions, i.e. after giving my name and date of birth. The NW station manager urged me to answer more questions. I also gave my address at that point. The police officer looked at my ID and wrote information down. It all took about half an hour or so.

IN the mean time the facility TSA manager came to talk to me. He realised it was basically power play on part of the TSA guys. The Manager was of micronesian origin. He told me that sometimes when he has to intervene, the pax say "we want to talk to an American" : The Manager told me he was going to send the offending TSA guy for more training, which according to him was negative.

Later on the NW station manager and I talked in the lounge. She said to me laughingly, "You have got to pick your battles" She knew exactly what was going on as her husband was Egyptian. I am a South Asian with a beard.

ABout half an hour after I had been in the WC, I went out to get my kids a burger, the same cop was standing outside the WC. I told him "You had better not be following me around". He made a sheepish comment that he wasn't and left.

BAsicaly you pissed the TSA community off as I had by calling them stupid.

I would like to have answer to your questions too.
Yaatri is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:10 pm   #32
Suspended
  
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 22,791
MKEbound, you can be arrested for leaking a secret that Hawley is an idiot.
Yaatri is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:12 pm   #33
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
  
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 83,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaukau
It's all heresay. As galling as it is. All heresay. Am I wrong? Hard to prove a suit, but makes a great story.
It's not all hearsay, for the incident report and the camera footage -- MKE has that now, don't they??? -- and the presence of the bag with the words on it, that's material evidence that goes beyond hearsay. And primary accounts of an incident are not mere hearsay either.
GUWonder is online now  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:13 pm   #34
  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesing
In almost any jurisdiction you are required to produce identification to a *sworn law enforcement officer* (aka peace officer) when asked to do so.
Huh? Produce an identification document? "Papers please?" Can you please cite examples (in the USA)?

I'm no lawyer, but I thought there was no requirement to produce ID at any time to engage in non-regulated/licensed activities (i.e., driving requires a license, so you have to show your DL to the cop). Walking down the street does not require a license. Nor does being a passenger in a car. Or standing in the airport.

I thought the Hiibel case established that the state (NV in that case) could require you to speak your name, but did not in any way say you had to show your papers to the cop.
studentff is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:15 pm   #35
  
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Lahaina, Hawai'i
Programs: HA Pua. Platinum WP, PR, QF, UA, AA, DL, NW Prince Preferred
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by GUWonder
It's not all hearsay, for the incident report and the camera footage -- MKE has that now, don't they??? -- and the presence of the bag with the words on it, that's material evidence that goes beyond hearsay.
Good. Still tough if "nobody" except OP heard anything about "You ain't got no 1st ammendment rights in here."
What about the nasty old "D__TH TO AM___CA written on a baggie? Is that cool to just pass through? (I couldn't even make myself type the full words, obviously.) P.S. Yesterday I thought this baggie thing was going to be easy!

Last edited by kaukau; Sep 26, 06 at 6:21 pm
kaukau is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:20 pm   #36
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaukau
Good. Still tough if "nobody" except OP heard anything about "You ain't got no 1st ammendment rights in here."
It would be clear from the facts that the passenger was detained for excercising his first-amendment right. What a TSO did or didn't say has no bearing-- the (documentable) fact that he was detained with illegal cause is a clear violation-- I don't see what you're getting at here.
Ari is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:23 pm   #37
  
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Lahaina, Hawai'i
Programs: HA Pua. Platinum WP, PR, QF, UA, AA, DL, NW Prince Preferred
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari
It would be clear from the facts that the passenger was detained for excercising his first-amendment right. What a TSO did or didn't say has no bearing-- the (documentable) fact that he was detained with illegal cause is a clear violation-- I don't see what you're getting at here.
The fact that it's difficult and expensive to prove constitutional rights cases, unless the ACLU thinks this one really has something going for it.
kaukau is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:24 pm   #38
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
  
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 83,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaukau
Good. Still tough if "nobody" except OP heard anything about "You ain't got no 1st ammendment rights in here."
Civil suits have been won on less -- including suits against harassment for benign political commentary. And of course there is always the "trial by public opinion" ... and, often enough, all it takes is some concentrated interests to prevail.
GUWonder is online now  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:29 pm   #39
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
  
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 83,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaukau
The fact that it's hard and expensive to prove constitutional rights cases, unless the ACLU thinks this one really has something going for it.
Do you think the freedom of easy political expression isn't worth defending? If you think it's worth defending, perhaps your donation check to the ACLU has been signed? If defending easy political expression is expensive, then defending much tougher, more controversial political expression will be even more costly. That's why it's best to nip this in the bud before the TSA stands for Thought Security Agency. (DHS is already trying to get there via proxy measures. ) It'll be a lot more costly to resolve later.

Last edited by GUWonder; Sep 26, 06 at 6:34 pm
GUWonder is online now  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:30 pm   #40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 11,048
I recall a couple of years ago that a couple had put a similar written comment about the TSA in their checked luggage. An irate TSA agent doing baggage inspection took their note and "reprimanded" the travelers in writing on their nots and put it back in their luggage. The travelers sued or otherwise complained. (I think it did get to court somewhere.) They won a weak apology from the resident TSA spokeshole.

This doesn't even come close to the harassment the OP experienced. I really like the idea of someone going through the same checkpoint at about the same time with a sign that says "Hawley is a Genius" and see what happens. Someone with the guts who happens to be going through MKE tonight or tomorrow should contact the OP and go for it -- for the sake of the Constitution many men & women, including myself, put their necks on the line to protect.
FliesWay2Much is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:31 pm   #41
  
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesing
In almost any jurisdiction you are required to produce identification to a *sworn law enforcement officer* (aka peace officer) when asked to do so. .
I agree with studentff, this is not true. Maybe in some states. Not in the Great State of Maryland.

However, when inside The Zone, is one required to produce ID at any time? Or just a boarding pass? After all, you can be a selectee and not show ID...
AisleSitter is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:31 pm   #42
  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: At an airport-on a cruise ship
Programs: UA-1K, MM, Hilton-Diamond, Marriott-Gold, SPG-Platinum Thanks to FT
Posts: 3,728
I would definatly call the media in MKE. I would call the papers, radio & local TV. This is getting beyond crazy. I don't think the ACLU can do anything unless you got arrested but I may be wrong. Call the local branch and see what they say. They may start a grass roots campaign having all their lawyers all around the country do what you did and see what happens....
Cheers
cruisr is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:31 pm   #43
  
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Lahaina, Hawai'i
Programs: HA Pua. Platinum WP, PR, QF, UA, AA, DL, NW Prince Preferred
Posts: 4,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari
It would be clear from the facts that the passenger was detained for excercising his first-amendment right. What a TSO did or didn't say has no bearing-- the (documentable) fact that he was detained with illegal cause is a clear violation-- I don't see what you're getting at here.
You may not write derogatory statements about the IRS on your tax return check. It's a crime. Maybe the TSA got confused with the IRS.
kaukau is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:34 pm   #44
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaukau
The fact that it's difficult and expensive to prove constitutional rights cases, unless the ACLU thinks this one really has something going for it.
You have no arguement from me on that point .

Hopefully, liberty will prevail in this case despite the expense and difficulty.

The "law" is expensive-- no question about that!
Ari is offline  
Old Sep 26, 06, 6:35 pm   #45
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaukau
You may not write derogatory statements about the IRS on your tax return check. It's a crime. Maybe the TSA got confused with the IRS.
Really? I didn't know that. (I guess it hasn't come up in my case). What's that about?
Ari is offline  
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Search Thread
Go to Top
Forum Jump
Contact Us - FlyerTalk - Archive - Top