Man detained for his writings.
#16
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,867
#18
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
I've had them on very rare occasions flip through books and a CD wallet. I asked a screener if it was really necessary to look over my individual CDs, and she just put them back in my bag and didn't say anything else. Another gent commented that he liked the author I was reading, etc. Way too nosy for the scope of their jobs, IMHO.
#19
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,974
If the screeners keep up these egregious abuses the courts might (finally!) be forced to smack them down. Not before time.
#20
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
And making any judgement regarding the content is indefensible. What next - certain books or papers are to be banned from airports ? Debt of Honor (Clancy) and Storming Heaven (Brown) probably at the top the list. The Koran is OK though, mustn't offend anyone.
If the screeners keep up these egregious abuses the courts might (finally!) be forced to smack them down. Not before time.
If the screeners keep up these egregious abuses the courts might (finally!) be forced to smack them down. Not before time.
#21
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,726
As for the matter at hand, Blogdad Bob post supporting the gestapo-like actions of the TSOs and managers in 5...4...3...2...1...
Last edited by n4zhg; Jun 28, 2009 at 3:06 pm
#22
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,726
Wrong.
The minute they started reading the document was the moment they stepped over the line. A document cannot be travel-related contraband.
I would submit that this is a perfect test cast as the victim of the intrusive TSA search is a writer with an unpublished manuscript. It's really no different than the TSA reading written materials that I might have that are considered company confidential.
The minute they started reading the document was the moment they stepped over the line. A document cannot be travel-related contraband.
I would submit that this is a perfect test cast as the victim of the intrusive TSA search is a writer with an unpublished manuscript. It's really no different than the TSA reading written materials that I might have that are considered company confidential.
#23
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,726
#24
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: LIS/ATL/other
Programs: UA 1K, Avis PC, Hertz PC, Sixt Plat, Marriott Gold, HH Silver
Posts: 1,983
It's a very slippery slope. Next thing you know they will prohibit certain reading material, starting with explosive-making recipes, then aircraft operating handbooks, then pilot training books, then maps, then pictures of buildings, and on and on. And of course, to make sure you don't being any of these dangerous items, they will have to read your papers.
Then they'll realize you can bring all those docs on your laptop or phone or Kindle, and they will have to ban those too.
It's the slippery slope towards flying naked.
My stance is that we have to accept the risk that people may carry bomb-making instructions. If we don't accept that risk the TSA will allege that they can read our documents, and the we go further down the slippery slope. That's why it's important to fight all these intrusions, and fight them hard, now.
#25
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: FrostByte Falls, Mn
Programs: Holiday Inn Plat NW gold AA gold
Posts: 2,157
It can. What if said document contained instructions on how to mix the right amounts of liquids and gels (say, shampoo and chapstick) to create an explosive? Could the TSA argue that they were going through the guy's materials to make sure they did not contain materials that could be used in travel-related terrorism?
It's a very slippery slope. Next thing you know they will prohibit certain reading material, starting with explosive-making recipes, then aircraft operating handbooks, then pilot training books, then maps, then pictures of buildings, and on and on. And of course, to make sure you don't being any of these dangerous items, they will have to read your papers.
Then they'll realize you can bring all those docs on your laptop or phone or Kindle, and they will have to ban those too.
It's the slippery slope towards flying naked.
My stance is that we have to accept the risk that people may carry bomb-making instructions. If we don't accept that risk the TSA will allege that they can read our documents, and the we go further down the slippery slope. That's why it's important to fight all these intrusions, and fight them hard, now.
It's a very slippery slope. Next thing you know they will prohibit certain reading material, starting with explosive-making recipes, then aircraft operating handbooks, then pilot training books, then maps, then pictures of buildings, and on and on. And of course, to make sure you don't being any of these dangerous items, they will have to read your papers.
Then they'll realize you can bring all those docs on your laptop or phone or Kindle, and they will have to ban those too.
It's the slippery slope towards flying naked.
My stance is that we have to accept the risk that people may carry bomb-making instructions. If we don't accept that risk the TSA will allege that they can read our documents, and the we go further down the slippery slope. That's why it's important to fight all these intrusions, and fight them hard, now.
Funny thing was that the cookbook was compiled from other, less intimidating books available in the public library.
#26
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
It can. What if said document contained instructions on how to mix the right amounts of liquids and gels (say, shampoo and chapstick) to create an explosive? Could the TSA argue that they were going through the guy's materials to make sure they did not contain materials that could be used in travel-related terrorism?
With that said, if a TSO saw a book with the title of "How to bring down an airplane" and felt it was suspicious, they should call in a LEO. The TSO should not ask ANY questions about the book or read the book. Leave it to the LEO.
#27
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,946
It can. What if said document contained instructions on how to mix the right amounts of liquids and gels (say, shampoo and chapstick) to create an explosive? Could the TSA argue that they were going through the guy's materials to make sure they did not contain materials that could be used in travel-related terrorism?
One can find instructions on how to make explosives all over the place. The Anarchist's Cookbook and The Poor Man's James Bond are excellent mainstream literature that details the synthesis of explosives. Are we now going to be banning books?
It's long past time to destroy this scummy, disgusting, un-American POS agency.
#28
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: HSV
Posts: 876
The only book I ever comment on that I see is when I see someone coming through with a book from the Wheel of Time series. It then usually turns into a brief discussion about the series in general, and how much it sucked that Robert Jordan freakin' died before the final book was written.
#29
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: IAH
Programs: CO 1k. Still proudly carry PSA Executive Flyer smile not the fake USAir "grin!"
Posts: 152
(snip)A perfect test case is one that doesn't conjure up 9/11 emotions-- judges are people too, even though they are supposed to look only at the law.
As I said, "I would not want to take this one on since the cartoons were terror-related. Since airport security in a "post-9/11 world" is a touchy topic, I'd want a case that was non-terror-related protected speech. Something like that could tip a judge on the side of 09/11/2001 instead of the side of 12/15/1791. The better case would have been the KHIAI bag."
As I said, "I would not want to take this one on since the cartoons were terror-related. Since airport security in a "post-9/11 world" is a touchy topic, I'd want a case that was non-terror-related protected speech. Something like that could tip a judge on the side of 09/11/2001 instead of the side of 12/15/1791. The better case would have been the KHIAI bag."
(snip)...but I wouldn't want to give the court any emotional fodder on a test case. I am a realist in addition to an idealist. If the detention had been significant and well-documented, then it would make for a much stronger case, IMO.
I think the ACLU should know about this regardless-- I will stand behind anyone who wants to take up this cause, but that person isn't me.
I think the ACLU should know about this regardless-- I will stand behind anyone who wants to take up this cause, but that person isn't me.
#30
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,726
"Significant and well documented" are problematic here, I agree. If the TSA were to deny it happened at all and assert that this guy was making it up to hype his comic books...it becomes a far tougher sell than Bierfeldt's case, of course, and, on that basis, I have to agree might not be a good fit with Bierfeldt's case.
If people would remember that the government is NOT here to help you, life would be a lot harder for the power geeks that inhabit the system.