Dan_E

Bingo, next argument? I mean seriously?

Nothing like arguing about current rules complaining that they will cause more restrictive future rules. How does crystal ball work, anyway?

Boggie Dog

The point remains that having a camera running while going through a TSA checkpoint is not a prohibited act.

Not having a form of ID while going through a TSA checkpoint is not prohibited.

What happened in Phils case were TSA employees who did not act properly.

sheneh

But yet you seem to have all the facts.

I did not mean in terms of perfection (please..) but rather in professionalism and knowledge of rules. And I would hope at the C/P that they are in fact right more often than the travelling public. Even supposing that all the TSA personnel on scene were unaware of the rules at the time, they had over a year to reflect on it.

How do you know if you do what is truthful about it if you do not see for yourself? Actually, I will grant you that much of his post was technically true; however, it still seems to be intentionally misleading and like you, suggestive that acquittal does not equal actual innocence. Which I will agree is true however again, the only reason to split this hair, if you think a guilty verdict is deserved. And I would think since it's a government-sponsored blog, BB should either side with the verdict or be more careful about discussing the case. I understand why he would choose to clarify the rules in light of the case but he could have done without getting into Phil's action or just saying "allegedly".

Dan_E

Yes. Most people (statistically speaking) travel for holiday and do not have their wallet stolen. It is "abnormal"

I suggest certain TSO agents receive more training on IDs than the average person, and see more IDs per assigned shift than a average person does during the same time period.

Yeah, so far I have gone through my young life paying for services I do not recieve. DMV, the Post Office, the Unemployment Office, the VA, the SSA, and AMTRAK. I dislike the waste, the poor service, but I live with them while I work to change the parts I can. I haven't found those threads here on TS/S yet, but I am ready to join in the discussions when they happen.

sheneh

What is your point?

Dan_E

Actually, touch my junk (viral video) is the diamond in the rough. NOOD seems tepid to this social media junkie, I acknowledge and concur on both howevre. I suggest that outside the frequent traveler community, or the more TS/S focused element of said community, few can even recall the stats on phil's actions. For the mainstream, he was just another guy making a fuss at a checkpoint. IMHO.

FriendlySkies

He wasn't making a fuss. He was doing something that is perfectly fine to do at the checkpoint. It's the idiot clerks that were making a fuss.

pmocek

Sorry, I must have missed that.

The security guard and police officers may have been inconvenienced, but they were doing their jobs, and were the source of any inconvenience that occurred. Other travelers were not inconvenienced. Ticket agents completely uninvolved, except for the one who, on the day after my release from jail, called me a hero (which I think is an exaggeration but was nonetheless appreciative of) and called his supervisor, who gave my colleague and I free tickets home. The inconvenience to those two was minimal. Court staff and state lawyers, like police, were just doing their jobs, and any inconvenience to them was brought by those who wrongly accused me of wrongdoing, as was the inconvenience brought upon the jury. I was inconvenienced, for sure.

Accepted.

Much like not presenting photos of one's grandkids would be.

sirdatary

Nicely done... completely missed the point.

Actually, the TSA/police failed to follow current rules and arrested Phil on dubious charges (that couldn't stick) because they didn't like what he was doing. But hey, if you're cool with that...

sheneh

True but he is saying that's how it appears in the mainstream and he is right to an extent. It hasn't got a huge amount of play in the media though expect down the road it will pop up as a tidbit in mainstream TSA features. Ultimately, "for the mainstream", their opinion will depend on how it's portrayed. At first blush it does seem like a guy making a fuss, especially because a lot of people think "refuse to show ID" means breaking the law and making a scene, but a quick Google search shows much of what little coverage there has been since the video was made public has been favorable to Phil.

Dan_E

Got it. Acknowledge. Roger. You win on those points. Now please give me mine.

Play nice. Carry an ID card. The Golden Rule isn't too hard to follow. Pay attention to your kindergarten rules. Be a bit more like the other 99.9% (see above)? Travel normal-like, you will get through. If you want my sympathy and Dan_E on your team, then turn off the darn camera and quit trying to be the poster child. Fight your fight, but don't pimp yourself in the meantime.

But those are my personal values, blame my parents. And the man.

sirdatary

Got it, you want the real world to be like kindergarten. You should have said that originally. We could have avoided this whole discussion.

Dan_E

I didn't mean to side-step the issue, forgive me please. I liken it to the people who swear allegiance to pmocek for his activities, yet line up like the rest of the crowd. ID card out, iPhone videocam off and placed in the basket ready for xray. viva la pmockek, you take the risks for me!

Dan_E

I apologize sirdatary, I forget that not everyone had a chance to read the book. Here are a few of my favorite excerpts, I hope it better explains my point.

greentips

There are more than a few people who only have a drivers license. The driver's license can be easily suspended and revoked for any number of reasons: a seizure, a brain tumor, alcohol related traffic stop (which in my state allows the police to immediately seize a drivers license). There are many others who do not have drivers licenses or ever had one. I know this because my office asks people for one and for those who do not we use an alternate procedure. We do not demand that they go get one. I know of several states who use driver's licenses for a myriad of things that have absolutely nothing to do with driving. One state demands you obtain a drivers license to get a fishing license, hunting license, buy a house (so you can pay property taxes if you can imagine that). That is the rule in that state. In another state, you don't need a driver's to do anything but drive. You can get a hunting and fishing licenses, and even buy a gun if you have a document (even an electric bill) that demonstrates you live in the state.

So, what someone from the big city or Washington DC thinks is common, and might just be in the district may, in fact not be the case in Alamagordo or Las Cruces. It is these people who can get caught up in web, and further, they are theoretically matched with a list which may or may not contain their name, which is "secret," they cannot contest easily or timely, and could be denied travel or seriously inconvenienced.

In my earlier days as a charter pilot/ferry pilot, I was frequently called to hop on the next flight to a destination, often with only 30 minutes notice. The company I worked for didn't have the best credit, and we nearly always walked up to the ticket counter with cash and bought a one way ticket. No one asked me for ID, no one compared my name with a secret list, no one challenged my right to travel to earn an income, meagre though it was. I walked up to the security screening station, they simply did exactly what the TSA is supposed to do when it screens my baggage: They checked to make sure I wasn't trying to smuggle guns, knives and explosives onto the airplane. Then after 3 minutes of inspection, I walked down to the airplane and got on.

In those days, airplanes got hijacked to Havana. While things are different, and motives have changed, the airlines took a dim view of their multi-million dollar airplanes being diverted, and increased security. This has not changed, except the unPatriot Act has removed liability and responsibility from those who have the most to lose: The airlines themselves.

And at what cost? We now must have government permission to travel in our own country, which can be denied without prior notice and without the ability to confront witnesses and evidence and without the opportunity to be heard in a court of competent jurisdiction. I believe that we started moving away from this philosophy of government in 13th Century England, and when England abandoned those protections in the 18th and 19th Centuries, we abandoned England.

Many were inconvenienced by the civil rights activists of the 50s and 60s, but many more were inconvenienced by Plessy v. Ferguson which permitted apartheid in America, until it was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education.

Phil Mocek decided not to sit on the bus, decided to ride home on an airplane, and to do it without allowing the United States to unlawfully interfere with an individual going about his lawful business. This has been decided by a jury and as concerned as I am about the waste of taxpayer dollars, I am much more concerned about the government wasting a taxpayer's dollars in a fruitless prosecution and the the colossal waste of every taxpaying traveler's time in the TSA witch hunts.