|
Originally Posted by FriendlySkies
(Post 23400267)
What if a passenger can't go through the scanner? What provisions are in place?
|
Originally Posted by WillCAD
(Post 23400661)
Well, that's pretty obvious - if you are selected for an AIT scan, whether by alarming the WTMD or by random chance or because a TSO is having a bad day and takes issue with your hair, eye, or skin color or accent or the fact that you're wearing a watch worth more than he makes in a month, you can either take the AIT scan, or you can opt out and get a full body rubdown with genital contact, coupled with a complete bag search where all of your items are removed and individually swabbed for an ETD test.
|
Originally Posted by FriendlySkies
(Post 23400685)
Well, we don't have a definitive answer for those who might have a medical issue. Perhaps they'll continue to do hand swabs if those pax are unable to go through the scanner? It would just be nice to know what the plan is..
We've been told, more than once, that those who are not physically able to go through AIT can be screened by WTMD and hand swabs. However, there are still plenty of reports of people with shoulder issues being told by individual TSOs that they are opt-outs, and being forced to undergo the enhanced pat-down. Since the rules are not enforced, there is absolutely no way to know what you will encounter, because you don't know whether you'll encounter TSOs and TSMs who follow the rules or not. Meanwhile, if you're medically unable to go through WTMD, you're told that the only alternatives are AIT or the pat-down. If you're physically unable to walk through the WTMD or AIT, such as those confined to wheelchairs, then your only alternative is the pat-down. Whatever fluff the TSA propaganda machine may put out to the contrary, people in wheelchairs are, quite simply, forced to undergo a physical search every time they transit a c/p. How extensive, invasive, and abusive this search is depends entirely on the TSOs conducting it. |
Originally Posted by WillCAD
(Post 23400978)
Whatever fluff the TSA propaganda machine may put out to the contrary, people in wheelchairs are, quite simply, forced to undergo a physical search every time they transit a c/p. How extensive, invasive, and abusive this search is depends entirely on the TSOs conducting it.
|
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 23401025)
And that is blatant discrimination.
Canes are another matter entirely. Every checkpoint should have non-alarming canes and they should be pro-actively offered to any WTMD-eligible pax using a cane or walker who is otherwise forced to use the NoS or get a grope. The NoS isn't even always an option because some of these folks have balance issues and can't hold still long enough for a successful scan without their cane or walker (not to mention it's a potential safety hazard). |
Originally Posted by TSAPressSec
(Post 23395178)
Not at all. I was unaware this was occurring. However, word has gone from HQ that TSOs should not be asking passengers to, "state your name for me." That is not to say that our officer might say, "How are you Mr. Smith," or "Have a nice day Mrs. Jones." If you hear that this is still occurring, please let me know.
We have limited staff in our public affairs office, so being on FlyerTalk as much as I originally envisioned is much more difficult. But no, I have not given up. |
Originally Posted by chollie
(Post 23401199)
Canes are another matter entirely. Every checkpoint should have non-alarming canes and they should be pro-actively offered to any WTMD-eligible pax using a cane or walker who is otherwise forced to use the NoS or get a grope. The NoS isn't even always an option because some of these folks have balance issues and can't hold still long enough for a successful scan without their cane or walker (not to mention it's a potential safety hazard).
My canes were xrayed and returned to me afterwards, and I was given a seated patdown. |
@TSAPressSec - still waiting for an answer:
Originally Posted by saizai
(Post 23081055)
Ross -
Here are a few very specific questions for you. If you need time to answer them or aren't allowed to, please respond saying so w/ an ETA or explanation, rather than not responding until you have clearance (because that looks like ignoring the question). 1. If presented with the pax's US passport, may a TSO / TDC demand that a pax present any secondary form of ID, for any reason? (Note: if the TDC suspects the passport is false, then they should probably be calling the police for felony violation of 18 USC §§ 1028, 1543, and/or 1544. Note that violating a safe conduct or passport is also a felony, under 18 USC § 1545.) 2. What is the SOP for screening someone who states that they are medically unable to hold their arms above their head as required for the AIT scanners, but are able to walk through a metal detector? Are they to be given WTMD + hand swab, full patdown, SSSS treatment, …? 3. The current TSA website states both that passengers may take medical liquids "in reasonable quantities". What is the SOP to determine how much liquid is "reasonable" for a given traveler to carry? What is the law authorizing TSA personnel to make a medical determination of this sort? 4. Does the TSA purport to have authority other than to conduct a search that is "no more extensive nor intensive than necessary, in the light of current technology, to detect the presence of weapons or explosives, that it is confined in good faith to that purpose, and that potential passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly"? For instance, if TSA believes that someone is carrying 20 gallons of shampoo, but has no reason to believe that the shampoo is a weapon or explosive (e.g. the pax volunteers to have it tested, and if tested, it x-rays and ETD tests clean), what grounds if any does the TSA have to deny them boarding (together with their 20 gallons of shampoo)? (Note of course that this question is completely independent of whether the airline agrees to transport that. I'm asking about TSA rules, not private contracts.) Thank you in advance for answering, if you do. |
Originally Posted by saizai
(Post 23437183)
FWIW, I have gone through TSA checkpoint once so far w/ two canes (necessary for balance), and I was given a (single) non-alarming cane while going through the WTMD (I stated that I was unable to raise my hands in the way necessary for the NoS).
My canes were xrayed and returned to me afterwards, and I was given a seated patdown. With no metal on, one security agent had me lean on him, and we walked through together, and he helped me back in the chair. If only that kind of service was available by the TSA... I was barred from using the WTMD and forced to a body scanner. I opted out because I couldn't assume the position (and cuz I don't like them). Boy were they mad at me, thinking I was throwing a gift horse in the face (they gave the NoS to *help* me, and here I am refusing). That was nerve wracking |
Originally Posted by STBCypriot
(Post 23408713)
I'll be sure to print this out and hand it to the next TSA ID checker that asks me to play the name game. But I doubt it will do any good and a supervisor will still have to be summoned because I refuse to play this silly and unnecessary game.
|
Looking forward to the next time there is an opportunity to say: "john jacob jingleheimer schmidt, his name is my name too".
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 23395493)
It's not about how fast it takes a citizen to get through the TSA checkpoint. It's all about intrusiveness, privacy, and a proper response to a validated threat. You people have done a great job since 2001 of manipulating the debate to avoid this issue.
Many of us have written on FT that PreCheck is nothing more than a government extortion program designed to silence a group of adversaries (frequent flyers) by addicting them to PreCheck just like a pusher slowly addicts a victim on drugs. At first, the pusher give you the drugs for free. When he has you hooked, he starts charging you more & more. Because you are addicted by then, you are willing to pay any price. I personally have likened PreCheck to the Communist system of privileges. In this case, the Party (i.e.: TSA) wishes to silence dissent among a large group of citizens. The party creates a system of privileges it grants to this now-privileged class of people. The privileged class dare not speak out against the party because the party can take away those privileges at any time for any reason. ...and, we all lined up (Some of us didn't line up and never will.) and gladly paid our $85 because we wanted our government to designate us as "privileged." Shame on us. "Comrade, you're a good 'party' member, here's your reward." "He is not 'loyal' enough to the 'party', so his privileges are hereby revoked." "Why were my privileges revoked?" "Former comrade, that is classified/SSI/private." |
"nomenklatura" -- thanks for helping me remember the Russian term.
Interestingly, and for the skeptical, read the quote below and my adaptation of it for America's airports: Coextensive with the nomenklatura were patron-client relations. Officials who had the authority to appoint individuals to certain positions cultivated loyalties among those whom they appointed. The patron (the official making the appointment) promoted the interests of clients in return for their support. Powerful patrons, such as the members of the Politburo, had many clients. Moreover, an official could be both a client (in relation to a higher-level patron) and a patron (to other, lower-level officials). Because a client was beholden to his patron for his position, the client was eager to please his patron by carrying out his policies. The Soviet power structure essentially consisted (according to its critics) of groups of vassals (clients) who had an overlord (the patron). The higher the patron, the more clients the patron had. Patrons protected their clients and tried to promote their careers. In return for the patron's efforts to promote their careers, the clients remained loyal to their patron. Thus, by promoting his clients' careers, the patron could advance his own power. Coextensive with the nomenklatura were TSA-PreCheck passenger relations. Officials who had the authority to appoint individuals to certain positions cultivated loyalties among those whom they appointed. The TSA promoted the interests of PreCheck passengers in return for their support. Because a PreCheck passenger was beholden to the TSA for his position, the PreCheck passenger was eager to please the TSA by carrying out TSA policies. The 21st Century U.S. Government power structure essentially consisted of groups of Precheck passengers who had an overlord (the TSA). The TSA protected their PreCheck passengers and tried to promote a hassle-free airport security experience. In return for the TSA's efforts, the PreCheck passengers remained loyal to the TSA. |
Different mn on PP and DL
My wife and I have decided to apply for Pre-check. We both meet all the qualifications so there shouldn't be a problem.
One thing though, she has a different middle name on her Drivers license and passport. Which should we use for Pre? Than match all our airlines FF info to that? And if it is her passport one, will she have to use this as an ID to check in and pass security on all flights including domestic? Bit of a hassle to check in with PP on domestic travel. Thanks for any info. |
Originally Posted by thebat
(Post 23461619)
My wife and I have decided to apply for Pre-check. We both meet all the qualifications so there shouldn't be a problem.
One thing though, she has a different middle name on her Drivers license and passport. Which should we use for Pre? Than match all our airlines FF info to that? And if it is her passport one, will she have to use this as an ID to check in and pass security on all flights including domestic? Bit of a hassle to check in with PP on domestic travel. Thanks for any info. |
Thanks
Originally Posted by bennos
(Post 23466961)
If she has a passport, why not apply for global entry instead? It only cost $15 more and comes with an ID card that can be used at TSA checkpoints.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:07 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.