Originally Posted by
DevilDog438
Thanks! I just read through the entire document, and I'm confused, as I can't find a $11k fine (
and tried to build the fine from multiple offenses). The most applicable I could find would be C.1.B., "Other Security Violations by Individuals or Persons", "Interference With Screening", "Non-physical contact", or $500-$1500. Yet is
refusing to continue the scanning process the same as
interference with the scanning process? Sort of sounds like "resisting arrest without violence".
Also, they might try C.1.C., or "False Threats", if they thought they could get away with saying that stating you'd call an LEO a "threat". $1000-$2000.
Originally Posted by
uncertaintraveler
One of the issues that I have with the whole "point of no return" concept is how can anyone validly give consent to something without knowing, in advance, what actual action(s) it is that they are consenting to?
If I pass a certain line, with the understanding that my passing said line evidences consent to X, Y, Z, and only X, Y, and Z occurs, then that's (possibly) fine.
But when the other party adds action(s) A, B, and/or C to what occurs upon my passing said line, and without advising me that such actions would, in fact, occur, then I think that you've got a consent problem.
Simply advising me that actions A/B/C could occur is not enough; I think that you have to advise me that actions A/B/C will occur.
Furthermore, what if I consent only to the occurrence of action Z, and not to any of the other actions?
The whole concept of a fine* for not consenting to, or for revising/amending one's consent during, the security process is ridiculous. That the TSA apparently feels that it has the authority to change the rules of the game midway through the process, but that I do not, speaks volumes about its mindset.
* Particularly to a fine that has an undefined, or ill-defined, value.
I'm not saying that it's right or possible, yet a perception that if the TSA continues this path, in this manner, this will be the end result, if they wish to maintain their perceived authority. I believe this has always been the reality, yet now it's being verbalized in a way that the average once-a-year passenger can conceptualize, and define travel patterns with.