Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Flyer at SAN says no to grope, escorted from checkpoint by LEO, threatened with suit

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Flyer at SAN says no to grope, escorted from checkpoint by LEO, threatened with suit

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 13, 2010, 7:56 pm
  #46  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Programs: UA PE, FL A+Elite, X-DL Silver, X-AA Gold, HH Diam, Marriott Silv
Posts: 213
This is ridiculous. I might take my chances of getting an invasive search for myself for work travel but would not take that chance with my daughter if we can't even leave if it becomes offensive.
sheneh is offline  
Old Nov 13, 2010, 8:03 pm
  #47  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Programs: DL GM
Posts: 60
He told me that their procedures are on their website, and therefore, I was fully informed before I entered the airport; I had implicitly agreed to whatever screening they deemed appropriate.

Does it really say on the TSA website that you must be fully screened once you enter the area? I posted in another thread the following from the TSA:

If you refuse to be screened at any point during the screening process, the Security Officer will deny you entry beyond the screening area. You will not be able to fly.
http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtrav...rial_1049.shtm

If a personal search is required you may choose to remain in the public area or go to a private area for your screening. If you refuse either option you will not be able to fly.
http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtrav...rial_1567.shtm

That sure implies to me that you can decide at any point to leave.
tj-traveler is offline  
Old Nov 13, 2010, 8:26 pm
  #48  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: Fallen Plats, ex-WN CP, DYKWIW; still a Hilton Diamond & Club Cholula™ R.I.P. Super Plats
Posts: 25,415
Originally Posted by Rabidstoat
Hopefully this 'rule' will be challenged in the courts soon. I am not a lawyer, but I am wondering at the constitutionality of it. I mean, I can see them agreeing that a private industry can make you comply with their screening policies to get into the terminal, but it just seems wrong to me that they can force you to comply to unknown policies just for walking into an area. Really? There has got to be a lawsuit eventually.
It's already been upheld by the courts, but that was in the context of less invasive searches, e.g. put your belongings on the x-ray belt & walk through the metal detector. You can't grab your briefcase & bolt after you've started the process. Generally, putting your property on the x-ray belt has been considered the start of the process. This approach has been well accepted as meeting the "minimally invasive" requirements for administrative searches.

What's happened here is that the despots at TSA have upped the ante to include strip searches (both virtual & real) and gropes/frisks/sexual assualts as part of the so-called administrative search and are trying to pretend it's just business as usual. They are finding out just how wrong they are.

Originally Posted by Ellie M
hat is one overbroad and scary reg. And besides that he left the SIDA once he no longer wanted to "comply." More importantly, compliance in this case was submitting to a sexual assault.
He did not leave, he was escorted out by several TSA personnel & a law enforcement officer.

Last edited by MikeMpls; Nov 13, 2010 at 8:46 pm
MikeMpls is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 1:21 am
  #49  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Diego, CA USA
Posts: 534
http://www.fox5sandiego.com/videobet...t-TSA-Pat-Down

Saw this reading the local news and lo and behold, there's already a thread here about it!
sdsvtdriver is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 3:14 am
  #50  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: DTW
Programs: DL 0.22 MM, AA 0.34 MM, PC Plat Amb, Hertz #1 GC 5*
Posts: 7,511
Originally Posted by sdsvtdriver
http://www.fox5sandiego.com/videobet...t-TSA-Pat-Down

Saw this reading the local news and lo and behold, there's already a thread here about it!
The news story did speak about the threats of civil lawsuit, and the recording did seem to indicate that the TSA statement was no if they would file a lawsuit, it's when they filed it.
sbagdon is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 3:31 am
  #51  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SAN
Programs: PR Premier Elite
Posts: 1,950
Great writeup on the local San Diego newspaper's web site. Looks very direct and factual.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...sing-security/
Mabuk dan gila is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 4:01 am
  #52  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 464
Looks like its starting to go viral. Over 500 comments on his site when they had 35 about 8 hours ago - wow!

Also on reddit with near to 2000 comments

http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/c...d_said_if_you/

Story appearing in mainstream news as well.

Last edited by oldjonesy; Nov 14, 2010 at 4:27 am
oldjonesy is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 4:34 am
  #53  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 616
I just want to comment on the TSO's comment "You gave up your rights when you bought your ticket".

UM when I buy a ticket, I do not se anything in any airlines CoC that states "Once you purchase your ticket, you hereby give up all of your rights protected by the Constitution of the United States of America or any other documents."

So, no, you do not give up your rights when you buy your ticket, the Constitution protects us from ourselves, others, AND THE GOVERNMENT!


Ah, I feel better now!
jco613 is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 4:41 am
  #54  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 464
Originally Posted by jco613
I just want to comment on the TSO's comment "You gave up your rights when you bought your ticket".

UM when I buy a ticket, I do not se anything in any airlines CoC that states "Once you purchase your ticket, you hereby give up all of your rights protected by the Constitution of the United States of America or any other documents."

So, no, you do not give up your rights when you buy your ticket, the Constitution protects us from ourselves, others, AND THE GOVERNMENT!


Ah, I feel better now!
I wouldn't worry about it, these TSO clerks barely understand the terminology they are sprouting let alone understand what they are actually saying.
oldjonesy is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 4:43 am
  #55  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,605
Originally Posted by jco613
UM when I buy a ticket, I do not se anything in any airlines CoC that states "Once you purchase your ticket, you hereby give up all of your rights protected by the Constitution of the United States of America or any other documents."
It would be BS anyhow - on a par with "no refunds" for faulty goods - which is a pretty good description of the TSA / DHS nightmare.
alanR is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 4:50 am
  #56  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 464
Just finished reading the comments on the original site. Dear lord there are some really, really idiotic and plain stupid people out there, ain't there?

I'd rather be "groped" as you call it than die horrifically in an explosion after a 50 000 foot free fall.

Also I'm pretty sure that filming airport security is a crime. If they take you to court what are you going to say? "They wanted to search me and I refused and then I filmed thier secruity gaurds" Sounds like a terrorist to me.
Someone else hoped he dies in an explosion next time he gets on a plane.
oldjonesy is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 7:14 am
  #57  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: Formally TPAbound/Delta Diamond 1MM/Hilton Diamond/Marriott Silver/Priority Club Gold
Posts: 270
Help for civil law suits

Found this video and website for those who might need legal help:

http://vodpod.com/watch/4857327-you-...ad-links-below

http://www.rutherford.org/
babe11 is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 7:53 am
  #58  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
Originally Posted by msimons
Somebody has to be first, and this may as well be it.
ACLU has probably been waiting for a case to try, maybe they'll help.
And if not, he should set up a website for legal fund donations.
I'd donate.
This will be a GREAT 4th Amendment lawsuit, assuming that ACLU and others decide to pursue it to USSC instead of settling. Unfortunatly the wimps over at ACLU choose to settle, like they did with Bierfeldt.
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 7:58 am
  #59  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: RDU
Programs: OnePass
Posts: 772
Originally Posted by GadgetFreak
Great. Im in an RCC heading to SAN. Flying out of there on Wednesday. I guess I should get to the airport early for my opt out. I can do that.
I have a trip into and out of SAN in January. I'm starting to get concerned about the airport portion of it.
mikemey is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2010, 8:15 am
  #60  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California. USA
Posts: 1,404
I think it is really weak from the TSO just to say" Read all our rules on our website".

A lot of people still dont have a computer. And even less know how to look things up. Or even know that they are supposed to look things up.

There is no law that says that passengers even have to get more info or even info from internet.

All they need really to know is on the tickets and other paperwork that comes with the purchase .

And it doesnt say any where on the ticket that you give up your rights to your body . And that you now have to let TSO touch you. That is just crap.
tanja is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.