SATTSO described a situation in which he refused to examine a passenger's boarding pass simply because the man refused to present identity credentials. He very clearly stated that he discontinued performing his duties upon the passenger's refusal to do something that the passenger was not required to do. This was not about safety or security, it was all about an agent of our government attempting to gain compliance from the public. "Papers, please!"

I've asked you multiple questions in this thread that you've yet to answer. Would you please do so?

1. When someone asks about potential trouble from TSA when traveling with damaged ID, I would expect your response to be, "No, you won't have any trouble from us, unless you consider answering a few questions and having you and your belongings thoroughly searched for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, to be trouble. You don't need to show us ID in the first place. Doing so is optional. It would just get you through our checkpoint with less scrutiny than we'll give you if you don't have it." That's the case, isn't it?
2. What do you mean by "the acceptable ID"? This thing that people have the option of presenting to you?
3. Of what significance are the things that "the acceptable ID" is required to have if passengers are not required to have "the acceptable ID" in the first place?
4. Do you think your agency clearly communicates the fact that passengers are not required to "show ID" at your checkpoints?

Regarding the ABQ incident: no comment.