Let's move on to BOS Terminal A and the Pre-Check line (though the others were not any better):



Looks like shoes and a computer went through last.

I was traveling through at about 6:45 am on New Year's Day with my wife and mother (who is over 75), both who went ahead of me. Mom and I declined the WBI. Per usual, I state that I am a "medical" for the WBI, but once again, I am told I will receive the full opt-out treatment. Since I had the temerity to question this, it was determined that a two-striper should do the honors.

After I pointed out my items, another two-striper, literally dropped my carry-on with handblown glass ornaments inside right on top of my laptop. Then he dropped my photography equipment bag with all its glass on top of my shoes. Asking him to be more careful elicited not a care.

While the first two-striper started the pat-down, I asked him about the medical procedures and he stated that it was only for those with medical devices. I am not sure that we ever understood each other about those unable to perform what the WBI requires.

He says that he knows the SOP, intimating that I do not. At one point he asks if I do work for the TSA since it appears I have more knowledge about procedures than the average passenger. He stated that he had been doing this for 10 years, likes his job and wants to keep it, so he doesn't plan on losing it for not following procedure. A decade on the job and he has been promoted exactly once and is still doing patdowns.

So he finishes and the swab is negative. I gather my belongings, pull out my camera and snap the above picture and put my lens cap back on. Only after this long wait does the female assist arrive for my mother, who was ahead of me in line. So I turn my attention towards that way while ensuring that I am staying out of the way.

After a little bit of patting down, I notice that the TSO has stopped in the middle of the procedure with my mother. A two-striper comes over and tells me that photography is prohibited. I noted that perhaps a review of Section 2.7 of his SOP was in order. He then storms off and, as he is walking pass the female TSO, states that he is going to get a supervisor.

The female TSO continues to refuse to complete the screening of my mother and states loud enough for me to hear that she doesn't want to be on YouTube. What is interesting is I never even took the lens cap off my camera during this.

After a little bit at least two (if not three) three-stripers are on the checkpoint plus a suit. It's beginning to look like a perimeter, except in this case they are watching my 75+ year old mother being patted down by another female TSO since the first one refused to complete the screening. So my mother had to suffer the indignity of being subjected to further invasiveness because a female TSO was too sensitive. Instead of letting the first female TSO off, she should have been ordered to complete the screening and not be kowtowed to when she failed to perform her duties.

None of the supervisors engaged either myself or, to my knowledge, my mother in any conversation about what was occurring. It was only in the middle of the second patdown that I approached the three-striper nearest me and asked him if photography is prohibited. He said it wasn't but then something to the effect that certain things were. When trying to determine what he meant, he was rather cryptic and said something to the effect that he would let me know if I started photographing whoever or whatever he was alluding to.

I mentioned to him that a two-striper had told me specifically that photography was prohibited, but he intimated that I must have misunderstood what he said. So what exactly did that two-striper go and tell his supervisors that caused at least three of them to come over, but yet none approached me about the two-striper's cause for concern? I have an idea. I did mention that stating photography is prohibited has a "chilling effect", but I didn't get the impression that he understood the gravitas of those words.


To top it off, unbeknownst to me, the TSO required my mother to remove her shoes and she protested as she has never had to do such since the new rule went into effect. She eventually complied with the order. Afterwards, she discussed this in my presence with a three-striper, who stated that it was a subjective test by the TSO and if the TSO felt the passenger looked under 75, then shoes come off. Since in his mind, she didn't look over 65, he felt the TSO was correct. Well that's a very interesting reading of the SOP and a loophole big enough to run a truck through it, which we let him know about.