ATR MMW experience
Dec 28, 2011, 10:22 am
#47
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 487
No, use of the AIT doesn't prevent a rubdown. But it significantly reduces the possibility. Opting out guarantees a full-body rubdown, whereas chances of a rubdown with AIT are maybe one in three.
Still, I will not let them touch me. Whether I alarm the AIT, or they choose me at "random", I will absolutely, categorically refuse the rubdown.
This is my choice. I am not meekly submitting, and I choose it with my eyes wide open as to the civil rights violation represented by AIT, and the radiation risk posed by MMW. But I will not be sexually assaulted, no matter what.
I doubt TSAs word that nobody sees the AIT image, and I'm not entirely certain that those on FT who say that the ATR software doesn't even create the image in the first place. Yes, it certainly is possible that it uses the raw scan returns to do its analysis instead of a finished image, but that doesn't mean that the original portion of the code doesn't still create and save the image for the perv in the box, as a backup or a form of resolution. Given TSAs record of spinning things to the point of outright lies, I tend to doubt or disbelieve anything they say these days.
I have always chosen to go through the AIT, despite how disgusting and despicable I found them, because I prefer to be peeped and have my Constitutional rights violated over being sexually assaulted. Perhaps it's my personal hangups, or a form of latent homophobia, but the idea of another man rubbing my entire body and touching my genitals makes my skin crawl far worse than the AIT peepshow. This is my choice, which I make fully informed and with my eyes open. I am not a sheeple who mindlessly accepts the load of fertilizer that the gubment has shoveled about how these civil rights violations are necessary, or legal, or safe; I know they're lying, but for the moment, until the country wakes up and AIT and full-body rubdowns are limited to cases with clear probable cause or articulable suspicion, I will take the AIT option over the rubdown.
So far, I haven't had to cease flying, but I will if they try to sexually assault me.
Still, I will not let them touch me. Whether I alarm the AIT, or they choose me at "random", I will absolutely, categorically refuse the rubdown.
This is my choice. I am not meekly submitting, and I choose it with my eyes wide open as to the civil rights violation represented by AIT, and the radiation risk posed by MMW. But I will not be sexually assaulted, no matter what.
I doubt TSAs word that nobody sees the AIT image, and I'm not entirely certain that those on FT who say that the ATR software doesn't even create the image in the first place. Yes, it certainly is possible that it uses the raw scan returns to do its analysis instead of a finished image, but that doesn't mean that the original portion of the code doesn't still create and save the image for the perv in the box, as a backup or a form of resolution. Given TSAs record of spinning things to the point of outright lies, I tend to doubt or disbelieve anything they say these days.
I have always chosen to go through the AIT, despite how disgusting and despicable I found them, because I prefer to be peeped and have my Constitutional rights violated over being sexually assaulted. Perhaps it's my personal hangups, or a form of latent homophobia, but the idea of another man rubbing my entire body and touching my genitals makes my skin crawl far worse than the AIT peepshow. This is my choice, which I make fully informed and with my eyes open. I am not a sheeple who mindlessly accepts the load of fertilizer that the gubment has shoveled about how these civil rights violations are necessary, or legal, or safe; I know they're lying, but for the moment, until the country wakes up and AIT and full-body rubdowns are limited to cases with clear probable cause or articulable suspicion, I will take the AIT option over the rubdown.
So far, I haven't had to cease flying, but I will if they try to sexually assault me.
Dec 28, 2011, 10:51 am
#49
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,332
No, use of the AIT doesn't prevent a rubdown. But it significantly reduces the possibility. Opting out guarantees a full-body rubdown, whereas chances of a rubdown with AIT are maybe one in three.
Still, I will not let them touch me. Whether I alarm the AIT, or they choose me at "random", I will absolutely, categorically refuse the rubdown.
This is my choice. I am not meekly submitting, and I choose it with my eyes wide open as to the civil rights violation represented by AIT, and the radiation risk posed by MMW. But I will not be sexually assaulted, no matter what.
I doubt TSAs word that nobody sees the AIT image, and I'm not entirely certain that those on FT who say that the ATR software doesn't even create the image in the first place. Yes, it certainly is possible that it uses the raw scan returns to do its analysis instead of a finished image, but that doesn't mean that the original portion of the code doesn't still create and save the image for the perv in the box, as a backup or a form of resolution. Given TSAs record of spinning things to the point of outright lies, I tend to doubt or disbelieve anything they say these days.
I have always chosen to go through the AIT, despite how disgusting and despicable I found them, because I prefer to be peeped and have my Constitutional rights violated over being sexually assaulted. Perhaps it's my personal hangups, or a form of latent homophobia, but the idea of another man rubbing my entire body and touching my genitals makes my skin crawl far worse than the AIT peepshow. This is my choice, which I make fully informed and with my eyes open. I am not a sheeple who mindlessly accepts the load of fertilizer that the gubment has shoveled about how these civil rights violations are necessary, or legal, or safe; I know they're lying, but for the moment, until the country wakes up and AIT and full-body rubdowns are limited to cases with clear probable cause or articulable suspicion, I will take the AIT option over the rubdown.
So far, I haven't had to cease flying, but I will if they try to sexually assault me.
Still, I will not let them touch me. Whether I alarm the AIT, or they choose me at "random", I will absolutely, categorically refuse the rubdown.
This is my choice. I am not meekly submitting, and I choose it with my eyes wide open as to the civil rights violation represented by AIT, and the radiation risk posed by MMW. But I will not be sexually assaulted, no matter what.
I doubt TSAs word that nobody sees the AIT image, and I'm not entirely certain that those on FT who say that the ATR software doesn't even create the image in the first place. Yes, it certainly is possible that it uses the raw scan returns to do its analysis instead of a finished image, but that doesn't mean that the original portion of the code doesn't still create and save the image for the perv in the box, as a backup or a form of resolution. Given TSAs record of spinning things to the point of outright lies, I tend to doubt or disbelieve anything they say these days.
I have always chosen to go through the AIT, despite how disgusting and despicable I found them, because I prefer to be peeped and have my Constitutional rights violated over being sexually assaulted. Perhaps it's my personal hangups, or a form of latent homophobia, but the idea of another man rubbing my entire body and touching my genitals makes my skin crawl far worse than the AIT peepshow. This is my choice, which I make fully informed and with my eyes open. I am not a sheeple who mindlessly accepts the load of fertilizer that the gubment has shoveled about how these civil rights violations are necessary, or legal, or safe; I know they're lying, but for the moment, until the country wakes up and AIT and full-body rubdowns are limited to cases with clear probable cause or articulable suspicion, I will take the AIT option over the rubdown.
So far, I haven't had to cease flying, but I will if they try to sexually assault me.
Dec 28, 2011, 11:25 am
#50
Moderator: Chase Ultimate Rewards
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 2P, MR LT Plat, IHG Plat, BW Dia, HH Au, Avis PC
Posts: 5,457
It's the same feeling I have every time I intentionally choose an airport without AIT so that I don't have to deal with this. Maybe I should be lining right up to the scanner every time, so I can register my mostly-ineffective protest?
It's a tough place the government has pointlessly put us in. So I'm personally doing my best not to judge and accept that people of good conscience can arrive at different conclusions about what is "best".
Dec 28, 2011, 1:14 pm
#51
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SJC
Programs: AA, AS, Marriott
Posts: 6,066
It depends. You can refuse the ETD before the TDC (where you submit the "papers, please"). There was a court case that said you can still be subject to civil penalties if you refuse the screening process after it's been started. This was because someone could theoretically test the limits and then walk away at a critical time in the screening process. Of course, this court case was long before the days of widespread patdowns, the war on water and NoS.
That being that, has anyone ever been fined from walking away? I don't think anything happened to the "If you touch my junk..." guy after he walked away.
That being that, has anyone ever been fined from walking away? I don't think anything happened to the "If you touch my junk..." guy after he walked away.
Dec 28, 2011, 2:07 pm
#52
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,425
It depends. You can refuse the ETD before the TDC (where you submit the "papers, please"). There was a court case that said you can still be subject to civil penalties if you refuse the screening process after it's been started. This was because someone could theoretically test the limits and then walk away at a critical time in the screening process. Of course, this court case was long before the days of widespread patdowns, the war on water and NoS.
That being that, has anyone ever been fined from walking away? I don't think anything happened to the "If you touch my junk..." guy after he walked away.
That being that, has anyone ever been fined from walking away? I don't think anything happened to the "If you touch my junk..." guy after he walked away.
Dec 28, 2011, 3:05 pm
#53
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Southwest Florida
Programs: AA lifetime Gold , DL Gold, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 572
It depends. You can refuse the ETD before the TDC (where you submit the "papers, please"). There was a court case that said you can still be subject to civil penalties if you refuse the screening process after it's been started. This was because someone could theoretically test the limits and then walk away at a critical time in the screening process. Of course, this court case was long before the days of widespread patdowns, the war on water and NoS.
That being that, has anyone ever been fined from walking away? I don't think anything happened to the "If you touch my junk..." guy after he walked away.
That being that, has anyone ever been fined from walking away? I don't think anything happened to the "If you touch my junk..." guy after he walked away.
The Alaska State Senator who refused further secondary screening when the ATI detected an anomaly in her breast area, which she said was caused by recent surgery for breast cancer. She too was escorted out of the airport and also has not been fined by the TSA.
In both cases, the media had picked up these stories and if the TSA had attempted to fine them, I am sure the media would have publicly destroyed the TSA’s already low creditability.
The threat of $11,000 fines are the TSA’s way to force people to comply with their abusive and unconstitutional searches. The TSA knows that if they do fine someone $11,000 and the person appeals the fine after the TSA kangaroo court upholds the fine, the courts might just rule the fine as excessive and force the TSA to drop the fine.
We all know the TSA is afraid of the courts, which is the reason they will always settle out of court if they cannot get the lawsuit dismissed, because this is the only way the TSA will be reined in, by court orders and the longer the TSA manages to stay away from court rulings, the longer this abuse will continue.
Mr. Elliott
Dec 28, 2011, 3:15 pm
#54
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,972
It depends. You can refuse the ETD before the TDC (where you submit the "papers, please"). There was a court case that said you can still be subject to civil penalties if you refuse the screening process after it's been started. This was because someone could theoretically test the limits and then walk away at a critical time in the screening process.
There hasn't been any case along the relevant lines and it's not at all clear how the court would rule in such a case. The reason given ("testing the process") was enough to avoid application of the exclusionary rule when the subsequent search as a physical inspection of the passenger's feet. It most certainly would not be enough to require a cavity search to avoid a criminal charge. There's clearly some line in between those that a court would have to find. On which side would requiring a pat down to avoid a fine come? Hard to say.
From a practical point of view, such a case is highly unlikely to come up because the TSA has made it clear from their actions that they will not impose a fine in such circumstances, most likely because they don't want to see such a case litigated.