Originally Posted by
Often1
Got nothing to do with that.
Ummm, yes it does.
Originally Posted by
Often1
OP violated the law.
Just like people that carry 3.5 oz of liquids or step 1" outside the crosswalk. Maybe he should have have been waterboarded?
Originally Posted by
Often1
...decisions as to whether to pursue violations are made at HQ.
TADA! Exactly what I'm talking about. HQ takes a situation that poses NO RISK, without even a suggestion of ill intent, and without due process decides a punishment and keeps a government blacklist without any oversight. Do you see anything wrong with this picture?
Originally Posted by
Often1
When you've actually done something wrong isn't the time to argue about ID because TSA most certainly can temporarily detain you...
I the OPs case, I specifically said he shouldn't volunteer information. In my case, I opted out; nothing more. I was threatened with arrest when I asked why they were asking for ID (and writing the information into a log book) for everyone that opted out.
Originally Posted by
Often1
...they most certainly can hold you until they can figure out who you are, most likely from ID on you as well as backtracking your BP.
Yes, they can. My point is about measured response.
There is nothing to indicate this case was anything other than forgetfulness. This could happen to anyone.
You seem to have a pretty black and white approach to all of this. TSA can also strip search you for having 3.5 ounces of shampoo. Does that sound OK to you too? Would you be OK with a government detaining you for walking 6" outside the crosswalk? How about fining you $11,000 for doing so? You would have broken the law after all.