![]() |
Originally Posted by saizai
(Post 25966959)
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. Worth thinking about. |
So what will happen to us who cant for some reason hold the position in a scanner?
They will walk into the scanner helping us holding up arms. Spread legs /turn us around? This is so weird. |
Originally Posted by tanja
(Post 25967534)
So what will happen to us who cant for some reason hold the position in a scanner?
They will walk into the scanner helping us holding up arms. Spread legs /turn us around? This is so weird. I have a legit right shoulder issue and find it difficult to hold my arms, right in particular, above shoulder height. I may just enter the machine and hold one arm up to about my shoulder level (the I surrender pose, one handed) and see what happens. There is no signage that I have ever seen that informs a person of policy in this type case. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 25967670)
May find out in February if this is still an issue then.
I have a legit right shoulder issue and find it difficult to hold my arms, right in particular, above shoulder height. I may just enter the machine and hold one arm up to about my shoulder level (the I surrender pose, one handed) and see what happens. There is no signage that I have ever seen that informs a person of policy in this type case. No md. notice. They cant do anything anyway since it only happens when I am "forced" in certain positions.Turn around would be very slow. Plus I have to hold on to the things around me. Plus I am my own Md. |
Originally Posted by tanja
(Post 25967801)
I can walk into a scanner. No arms up then I will loose my balance. Plus no speading legs at all. Sciatica from being pregnent a lot of times.
No md. notice. They cant do anything anyway since it only happens when I am "forced" in certain positions.Turn around would be very slow. Plus I have to hold on to the things around me. Plus I am my own Md. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 25968304)
I've seen you mention turning around a couple of times. There is no turning around with the MMW scanner, it has a moving scanner array.
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 25967354)
If TSA has lied or misstated, in any way, information contained in its new AIT PIA I would think that would compromise anything else TSA has published or testifies too including any court filings.
Worth thinking about. My objection is to being forced to undergo an electronic strip search to begin with. I'd object further to other parts, but IMO that's enough, and I want a ruling that can't avoid the issue. |
Originally Posted by saizai
(Post 25968852)
Sadly, I don't think so. This specific issue has come up before, and they got a total pass on it. It's also a sidetrack from my argument — whether or not they use ATR, or save images, is completely irrelevant to my 4th Amendment objections. I don't want to give them any excuse to get a ruling based on ATR vs non-ATR, or image saving vs not.
My objection is to being forced to undergo an electronic strip search to begin with. I'd object further to other parts, but IMO that's enough, and I want a ruling that can't avoid the issue. TSA is justifying forcing everyone through WBI because it can't record images. I think that is an important data point, especially if TSA is being dishonest. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 25968882)
TSA is justifying forcing everyone through WBI because it can't record images. I think that is an important data point, especially if TSA is being dishonest.
|
|
Originally Posted by saizai
(Post 25973202)
He refused to go through the scanner and he was refused boarding, his bags removed from the plane and returned to him. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 25973536)
Did this happen?
The TSM later overruled the STSO. ETA: Corrected. Thanks for bringing that to my attention! |
Damn, that STSO is a !@#$% idiot.
|
Originally Posted by FlyingUnderTheRadar
(Post 25974591)
Damn, that STSO is a !@#$% idiot.
|
Going to take sort of a devil's advocate perspective here. Some of you may hate me after this.
So, firstly, saizai, I applaud you for taking a stand. That mustn't been easy. As someone who also has a disability - deafness - I completely emphasize. (And, thanks for captioning your videos, BTW!) It's sometimes not easy to live in a world that's not designed for us. With that said, to be perfectly honest with you, it really looks like the process was a bit drawn out. Saying stuff like "I can, but I refuse"; "I categorically refuse to go through the AIT" will just confuse the screeners. I would simply say "I opt out because of a medical condition." If they probe, say "you're not a doctor and hence medically licensed; I will simply say my shoulder is blown out [or xyz excuse]." Refusing to answer their questions just sets them off and prolongs the process. I could tell the STSO was really just trying to do his job, and was probably thrown off by how difficult the process was being made for him. Not saying you were being difficult, per se, but, I mean, if I were in your shoes, I would maybe take it down a notch? He was trying to ask you closed-ended questions, not ambiguous questions, and you kept giving him ambiguous answers. Unfortunately, unintelligent people have a hard time with ambiguous answers, so it may be better to give simple, closed-ended answers, than kind of a wishy-washy answer like "I can if I really need to, but I refuse" - he took it as a "no." You know what I'm saying? I'm not trying to sound like a "sheeple" - we all have rights! And the TSA goes too far in so many scenarios. What's the 'but'? The 'but' is that, at the end of the day, those screeners are doing their jobs - they have rent, mortgages, loans, children, etc. to support/pay. (Not saying that 'doing their jobs' makes what they do/how they treat people okay - just pointing out a fact.) Of course, TSA screeners should be given more discretion, more empowerment, more ability to make common sense decisions/overrides, but you should also know that you're probably dealing with ignorant idiots who, unfortunately, do have the ability to ruin your day, and tread along that line. Confusing and frustrating them (completely unintentionally on your part, mind you, and it's also on them - they should control their reactions more and be more prepared for the "unorthodox" interactions) just makes things harder for everyone. It's okay to make waves! It really is. It's just, in this particular situation, it really seems to have caused everyone more pain than necessary. I'd just say "yes, I am medically unable to stand, so I am opting out." You'd probably be in and out within 15 or so minutes, and without all the back and forth. I'm glad the TSM was able to override Adbul (sp?)'s decision and allow a pat down/examination of your things, though - that's the right thing to do. I do have to say the TSM was quite kind, and Abdul wasn't THAT rude, considering it could have been so much worse. I'd keep it simple, document/videotape everything, then write my Congress member, start a petition, go viral with social media, try to get support that way. Just my two cents. I hope I didn't come across as offensive at all. If you want, you can PM me more and we can discuss this more. Obviously, I wasn't in your shoes that day; I'm just saying this as an outside, neutral observer. You did what you needed to do, and I wish you the best of luck with your lawsuit. TSA really needs a reminder that they're here on OUR dime, and they can't treat people like cattle, especially minorities and people with disabilities. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:15 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.