The one time I had a problem with a TSO at BOS was when I insisted on watching my bag at all times after opting out and not standing exactly where he told me. The TSO told me that that's why they hired "federal officers," so that we could be sure that our belongings would never be pilfered at the checkpoint.

Thus, the woman's claim that the TSO stole jewelry must be false; a TSO assured me that they don't steal.

Mike

Or just a high school diploma.

Because it never went final. When Skeletor and Kippie saw it, they knew it had to be suppressed, in that it undermined their strategy to grow the TSA brownshirts.

Ok, that makes sense. (Well, as much as anything in this discussion makes sense ...)

The have been several times when TSA screeners have blocked me from seeing my luggage when I have opted out. One especially egregious incident at OAK involved a supervisor telling me the reason I couldn't see my bags was that the machine was in the way, and they weren't going to let me move to see them because I was creating an incident by insisting on seeing them. I filed three reports on that one (voice message, form at the airport, USPS letter).

I only got a response to the mailed complaint. Basically I was told "you are responsible to keep your luggage in view", "no, they aren't supposed to stand in front of to keep you from doing that" and "no, there is nothing you can do when that happens". (BTW, the others complaints were apparently lost.

Until the TSA has effective procedures that let passengers keep control of their bags (which isn't likely to happen), they are responsible. That means no immediate presumption of innocence. Sometime they will need to prove that a theft didn't occur. Which implies always retaining video records when an 'event' occurs, just as any non-government organization would be expected to do.

Yes -- just to add that internal working drafts of documents from any agency are not subject to FOIA release.

Exactly right. And we need politicians that will treat TSA theft as a federal crime, with serious penalties, and not just petty larceny.

A) Yup. Nothing is absolute.

B) TOTAL HOGWASH! Freedom, individual liberty, and involate personal rights are the most important and effective security and safety tools imaginable. Every one of the rights spelled out in the Bill of Rights has a direct, measurable, practical effect on the security of the individual and/or on society as a whole.

The only "danger" posed by individual liberty is the danger that someone will abuse it to do harm to others. But guess what? Eliminating liberty doesn't eliminate that danger! People will still do harm to others, even when living in a repressive police state. Which, I guess, means that there is no logical reason for eliminating liberty, except personal or ideological reasons like the Nazis and the Soviets used. And like those that Pistole is using now.