Even then, there have been times where I've said "I am unable to lift and hold my arms" and they've heard it as "opt out".

Which should be shot down by the courts. The only reason EPIC lost their case about the body scanners was because TSA told the court they were optional and that people could chose to have a pat down. If that option is removed, the court should agree with EPIC that it's a 4th amendment breach.

Saizai, could you have been targeted by TSA specifically because of your lawsuit?

The first thing I noticed was the three-stripe clerk who harassed you was slick enough to have turned his badge around so you couldn't see it and film it.

Concealing identity seems ethically questionable.

A lot of what TSA does is ethically questionable. The clerk knows it and prefers to hide his identity to prevent his further embarrassment. The fact that TSA does nothing about this behavior speaks volumes. Everybody in the organization doing their not be held accountable.

Should is the operative word here. The courts used the opt-out as an excuse to approve TSA's 4th amendment violations, and I seriously doubt that they will ever rein in this rogue agency. In fact, courts have been eroding the 4th amendment for decades, ever since a certain segment of our population started screaming about "law and order." No knock laws, stop and frisk, arbitrary vehicle searches, warrantless wiretaps - all violate the 4th, but all have been rubber-stamped by security minded judges. TSA is just the latest manifestation of an ever-increasing police state.

That thought had crossed my mind as well.

So how did it end?

The video stops after the TSA STSO and one other TSA screener brings your belongings back. Did a TSM or other TSA representative arrive and what did they do?

I switched from voluntarily opting out to declaring myself medically ineligible a few years ago. When voluntarily opting out, I got retaliatory screening a good percentage of the time; with medical ineligible it's been never.

I have, however, had a few instances where the individual either didn't know the policy or thought I was opting out. "So you're opting out" has been restated to me to which I reply with a simple "no, I'm not opting out, I'm medically ineligible". Sometimes that goes back/forth a few times until I tell them if they don't understand the difference get a supervisor who does and can then re-train them. When they don't know the policy they look at me like I've got two heads until they get clarification from a supervisor who usually does know the policy. I one had a case where the individual literally demanded that I tell her precisely why I was medically ineligible. I just smiled and asked if she was my personal physician? No? HIPAA laws, now go get your supervisor. Amazingly the supervisor actually apologized to me after that encounter and said he'd make sure she was re-read on the policy.

I do not have reason to believe that the grunts (including STSO) recognized me. I suspect that the TSM might have, but have no solid evidence.

See videos # 2 & 3 in the playlist.
A TSM came, argued with me more, argued with me about my refusal to give him medical information for him to make a medical determination about whether I need liquids, and eventually allowed me to get a pat-down and liquid screening.

Thanks, didn't pick up on the link for the videos. Technology challenged. ;)

One thing that came to mind, in the new PIA for WBI TSA claims that the current MMW WBI machines have no ability to record or save images.

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/fi...a-32-d-ait.pdf

Think your can pry the current contract specifications out of TSA?

Would be willing to bet a ice cold Coca Cola that the machines have all the abilities still built in, at least as far as hardware goes.

a) That's a lie, like it was before. It necessarily must record the image pending ATR analysis. And it probably has a debug mode.
b) I don't give a damn. I object to being strip searched, period. Whether someone sees or saves the image afterwards only magnifies the violation of my 4th Amendment rights; it's not a necessary component.

Potentially. Hadn't thought of it. I can make it part of the administrative record demanded, since it's relevant to safety and privacy, and TSA's mere say-so is not "best evidence" vs their contracts and technical specs.

I'm batting 1.000 on medical opt out. A lot of times I'll mention it to the screener working around the bins and tell them I have a blown shoulder. That usually works well so if there's a question at the WTMD, the screener can say (and has said) "yeah, he told me about it already."

I've never needed a sling. Just because I have use of my arm doesn't mean my shoulder isn't bad. Fortunately, it's never gotten to asking them where they got their medical degree.

Main thing I found that helps is just being casual about it. "Hey man, my shoulder's blown and I can't hold it up like that" has worked every time - even before the issue was legitimate. :D