cordelli

Which has what to do with this thread? This is about a group of people planning to go to airports and follow exactly the procedures outlined for them. Nobody here is standing their ground, if they were standing their ground they would be refusing both the scanners and the pat down, but that's not even an option.

Call it what you want, but you are following the procedures outlined by the TSA for those who don't want to be scanned. That's not at all historic.

beauvoir

There are very few people who would have the courage to decline both the scanner and the opt out, given that if a person does decline both, they aren't just free to leave. Instead they have to be "escorted" out by a very pissed-off police officer, which perhaps involves handcuffs and getting slammed to the ground.

I for one am too chicken to face this, due to my age and physical condition. So I'll protest in my own chicken way by opting for the grope rather than the radiation.

The advantage to the grope is that at least it's more work for the smurfs to have to do. So in that way, you are bleeding the beast a little bit.

fendertweed

simply put ... it's the price of freedom and our constitutional rights.

if you don't like it, as they used to say ... go back to Russia.

Democracy is messy. If you don't like the price go somewhere where they will move you with fascistic expeditious speed while you lose the constitutional rights you have here.

I have no sympathy at all for your self-centered and narrow-minded position, though I fully defend your right to be a self-absorbed sheep.

Boggie Dog

Your right. We should stop flying and put the airlines out of business.

essxjay

Sure it is. (And there are degrees of standing one's ground.)

But acts of civil disobedience are, which the OP suggests with an organized mass opt-out. The History of TSA Revolt has to start somewhere before it can be written.

cordelli

I never said that.

What I'm saying is you should stop comparing your "following established procedures" with somebody who choose to stand up for what they believed by breaking a law and getting arrested for it.

To use the Rosa Parks analogy people on this forum keep kicking about, you are all just getting up and going to the back of the bus, because that's what you have to do to take that bus ride. That's not at all what she did.

Boggie Dog

The only two options as I understand your position is to either accept what TSA is doing, even if grudgingly, or to not cooperate and not fly at all.

The not flying would be the true show of disobedience.

Would that also not result in the airlines going out of business if the protest continued for a long enough period?

You want to go where?

Yes. But presumably, the pressure on Congress and the Executive Branch to resolve the situation before it came to such a pass would be tremendous.

Boggie Dog

I think that is part of the idea behind Opt Out Day.

The extra workload placed on TSA would get some attention.

I for one, and it seems many others, are not happy with the use of WBI, especially of the xray variety, and we certainly are not happy about the agressive pat downs.

MikeMpls

That's fine, let them go to the brink.

A major reason why we are in this situation is that the airline like having TSA pick up the screening costs. When all you are doing is eliminating cost centers, they won't mind. When it threatens the airlines' existence, they'll change their tune.

Boggie Dog

I am not against putting strong pressure on the airlines. If they go broke so be it.

The TSA has to be brought under control, the airlines should be responsible for all screening functions and I say hit'em while they are down.

TSA is on the ropes right now from all of the bad press but we are still in the early rounds. Keep up the pressure.

swag

Thinking about the Rosa Parks analogy, the true act of civil disobedience would be to opt out, then refuse the pat down and proceed into the secure area. Best case scenario is that you are then promptly arrested. Worst case is that they're slow to react, lose you, and have to dump the terminal on a busy travel day, pissing off thousands of passengers who will likely never hear of the noble motivation that caused their 2 hour delay.

I guess I'm just not sure how opting for a pat-down helps the cause. If enough do it to cause a real backlog, just means they and/or the folks behind them will miss their flights. The TSA frontline folks will still work their shift and then go home. And news of a one-day uptick in opt-opt numbers likely will never reach the decision makers.

I am flying on the 24th, and departing from an airport which has both NoS checkpoints and WTMD checkpoints. I plan to use the latter.

skidv25

I'll be flying out of BOS on the 24th, and if I get chosen for the NoS, I'll be sure to opt out. Of course, the same applies to any of my other travels this holiday season. I'll do what I can to spread the word!

peachfront

I plan to opt out for health reasons. I don't object to a pat-down. I'm not sure what to tell you. You seem to object to ionizing radiation of young people -- you mention a child -- and I absolutely agree. Heck, I'm not all that young, and I'm still not ready to say, "OK, I'm dead in 30 years anyway, so I don't care if you expose me to extra ionizing radiation." However, you also object to a pat-down. May I ask what type of search you DON'T object to? My feeling is that we can best protect our health and our ability to fly if we offer a reasonable alternative to the ionizing radiation. I don't see a health problem with a pat-down done by a professional person. My two cents only.

Swag, Rosa Parks was a wonderful person, but most of us are not wonderful persons. Me, I'm a selfish human being and I'm not traveling to fight for a cause. Opting for a pat-down helps your health today. Do you really want to be exposed to ionizing radiation performed by non-medical personnel? Trust me. You don't. A pat-down makes you grumpy. The ionizing radiation potentially gives you cancer. There is no safe level of exposure to ionizing radiation. None. You should only deliberately expose yourself to ionizing radiation if you must for a serious health reason, determined by someone who has been to medical school, not by a glorified security guard. Hmm. Grumpy or cancer, cancer or grumpy. It's pretty easy for me to make that decision.

MikeMpls

These aren't "patdowns" by "a professional person". They are sexual assaults & intrusive searches (don't forget the "resolution search" that occurs behind closed doors that almost certainly is a real strip search). The so-called professionals are GED's often hired from ads on pizza boxes & gas pumps.