Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 27, 09, 7:42 pm   #1
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Man detained for his writings.

Comics artist Mark Sable detained for Unthinkable acts

Quote:
Boom! Studios sends word that comics writer Mark Sable was detained by TSA security guards at Los Angeles International Airport this past weekend (May) because he was carrying a script for a new issue of his comic miniseries Unthinkable. ...

..."The minute I saw the faces of the agents, I knew I was in trouble. The first page of the Unthinkable script mentioned 9/11, terror plots, and the fact that the (fictional) world had become a police state. The TSA agents then proceeded to interrogate me, having a hard time understanding that a comic book could be about anything other than superheroes, let alone that anyone actually wrote scripts for comics.
Linkage
__________________
Trollkiller's new home
Trollkiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 09, 7:49 pm   #2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL
Programs: AA EXP/Marriott Plat/Hertz PC
Posts: 12,726
It doesn't say he was detained for any length of time. It must be because screeners read a lot of comics.
whirledtraveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 09, 8:52 pm   #3
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by whirledtraveler View Post
It doesn't say he was detained for any length of time. It must be because screeners read a lot of comics.
It must be a good comic, the screener had to sit down to read it.
__________________
Trollkiller's new home
Trollkiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 09, 9:52 pm   #4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: Delta Air Lines, US Dividend Miles, Rapids Reward
Posts: 30,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trollkiller View Post
It must be a good comic, the screener had to sit down to read it.
Yeah, he can do that. He will readability the comic book all of the time. He will try to speak with very good English skills.
__________________
https://www.facebook.com/scottweinbergpage?ref=hl Go to my new Facebook Page. Enjoy!
http://www.scottysair.com/
N830MH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 6:35 am   #5
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: FrostByte Falls, Mn
Programs: Holiday Inn Plat NW gold AA gold
Posts: 2,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trollkiller View Post
Chilling when they go through a guy's papers. How did this guy's papers pose any threat to airline security? Guess that the adage the pen is mightier than the sword came into play on this.
AngryMiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 6:38 am   #6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL
Programs: AA EXP/Marriott Plat/Hertz PC
Posts: 12,726
Looks like he has grounds for a lawsuit. The TSA should not be reading through his papers. Words are not a credible weapon on an airplane.
whirledtraveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 6:39 am   #7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hyatt Diamond, Hertz #1 Gold, DL Silver, Carlson Silver, Marriott Silver, Hilton Gold
Posts: 17,894
'Dem TSA folk luv da comic type bookies. As long as there ain't no biggie wurds!
__________________
You believe that you are special, that somehow the rules do not apply to you. Obviously you are mistaken.
Jaimito Cartero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 7:51 am   #8
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 31,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryMiller View Post
Chilling when they go through a guy's papers. How did this guy's papers pose any threat to airline security? Guess that the adage the pen is mightier than the sword came into play on this.
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.
__________________
GO HOKIES
exerda is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 8:02 am   #9
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by exerda View Post
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.
It must be a struggle to find something interesting in an otherwise boring, thankless, low morale job...
__________________
"Keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L. Mencken
IslandBased is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 8:18 am   #10
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: PHX
Programs: AA Ex Platinum, Marriott Gold, HH Diamond
Posts: 2,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryMiller View Post
Chilling when they go through a guy's papers. How did this guy's papers pose any threat to airline security? Guess that the adage the pen is mightier than the sword came into play on this.
Maybe I'm missing something (I'm not a lawyer), but wasn't that the essence of the Fofana case-once the screener determined the papers/whatever bore no threat to aviation security, i.e., weapons or explosives, there is no grounds to search further?
txrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 8:25 am   #11
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: FrostByte Falls, Mn
Programs: Holiday Inn Plat NW gold AA gold
Posts: 2,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by txrus View Post
Maybe I'm missing something (I'm not a lawyer), but wasn't that the essence of the Fofana case-once the screener determined the papers/whatever bore no threat to aviation security, i.e., weapons or explosives, there is no grounds to search further?
Yes, my take on it as well. Papers x-rayed and passed then no reason to give them as much as a second glance. This, IMHO, is way out of bounds by the TSOs and should result in some retraining for their primary mission of WEI.
AngryMiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 9:20 am   #12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 30 miles south IAD 1R
Posts: 20,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryMiller View Post
Yes, my take on it as well. Papers x-rayed and passed then no reason to give them as much as a second glance. This, IMHO, is way out of bounds by the TSOs and should result in some retraining for their primary mission of WEI.
This guy should contact the ACLU. Perfect ammunition for their ongoing case.
halls120 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 10:01 am   #13
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by txrus View Post
Maybe I'm missing something (I'm not a lawyer), but wasn't that the essence of the Fofana case-once the screener determined the papers/whatever bore no threat to aviation security, i.e., weapons or explosives, there is no grounds to search further?
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 far a Fofana is concerned, the TSO admitted that going through the envelopes was a pure fishing expidition for non-travel-related contraband and that the bag had been cleared before s/he continued to snoop.

In this case, the TSO's were not on a fishing expedition for non-travel-related contraband, but they were doing an "investigation" into something that could, possibly implicate airport security. I'm not saying that I agree that going through papers one considers "suspicious" is part of a proper WEI search, but a good test case, this is not.
Ari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 10:21 am   #14
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari View Post
In this case, the TSO's were not on a fishing expedition for non-travel-related contraband, but they were doing an "investigation" into something that could, possibly implicate airport security. I'm not saying that I agree that going through papers one considers "suspicious" is part of a proper WEI search, but a good test case, this is not.
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.
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 09, 10:33 am   #15
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer View Post
The minute they started reading the document was the moment they stepped over the line. A document cannot be travel-related contraband.
Agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer View Post
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.
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."

I agree with your analysis of the facts and the law, 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.
Ari is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:58 pm.