<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Mats:
Kathleen Sweet's book, Terrorism and Airport Security (2002) discusses the legal precedents for consent to be screened, particularly the notion of "implied consent."</font>
The interesting thing to me is the escalation. I suppose that back during the immediate post-9/11 period when there was screening at the gate, if someone declined there, chances are they would be escorted out of the secure area and miss their flight. Problem solved, still voluntary.
Now, if they choose to screen on an airplane or after landing, if someone declines, well, then what? Arrest? On what charge? And, for what purpose? There's no longer a security threat for that flight. Why wouldn't they be just escorted out of the terminal?
[This message has been edited by whirledtraveler (edited Jan 07, 2004).]