|
Since screening is an "administrative search", not a criminal investigation, I don't see why/how refusing would/could lead to criminality. Even if you refuse in the middle of the screening/groping process.
If you refuse to consent, you're denied access to the secure area. Nothing more. |
If I'm not mistaken hasn't there already been a court decision saying that once a person begins screening they must finish screening and cannot just leave?
Edit to add: Had time to refresh my memory. https://www.wired.com/2007/08/court-says-trav/ |
Originally Posted by Often1
(Post 26762284)
The thread title is completely misleading. As is made clear, TSA does not propose anything. One low-level <redacted by moderator> who happens to be a TSA employee has proposed something at a local level in upstate NY...
Fortunately, This is getting immediate rejection across the board. Just a collection of idiots focused on a non problem. |
Originally Posted by catocony
(Post 26776561)
If you get into the security line at an airport, you're in it for a half hour, you then need to use the bathroom, then a stupid law like this would affect you.....
|
Originally Posted by Bonehead
(Post 26814869)
The way I read it, only if you are selected for extra screening for some reason would the proposed law limit your options. The authorities don't want bad guys to be able to opt out of an additional level of scrutiny if they were testing the system in order to see if they could sneak some weapon in.
How it will actually be used when screeners across the country choose to exercise their 'discretion' is something completely different. I suspect that it is EXTREMELY rare that someone refuses to complete screening, and I suspect it is even rarer that someone who is being forced to a backroom for a strip search tries to exit the process. Indeed, I would like to see how many times this has happened across the country, except TSA would either say they don't keep track or the information is SSI. One of the people who would almost certainly have been arrested under a law like this is Alaska State Rep. Sharon Cissna. She was being treated in Seattle for breast cancer. She'd flown down once and had a horrendous looky-touchy private exam, necessary to satisfy the prurient nosiness of a few TSOs. On a subsequent trip for treatment, when faced with a repeat of the disgusting invasive search, she declined. We're talking a small woman in her 60's. The usual crowds of non-working BDOs, STSOs, LTSOs and LEs surrounded and threatened her. She eventually was allowed to leave SEA to take a ferry home to Alaska. Under this proposal, she would have been forced to undergo a punitive and retaliatory version of the humiliating and painful examination of her breast cancer surgery scars - and then been arrested. THAT is how this law would actually be used if passed. None of this BS about 'bad guys' testing the system every day. Just a thug cop hired on at TSA and trying to double-down on the TSA attitude that all pax are guilty criminals. His next proposal will almost certainly be to arm TSOs. |
Originally Posted by Bonehead
(Post 26814869)
The way I read it, only if you are selected for extra screening for some reason would the proposed law limit your options. The authorities don't want bad guys to be able to opt out of an additional level of scrutiny if they were testing the system in order to see if they could sneak some weapon in.
And TSA said everyone could Opt Out of Whole Body Imaging until they said you can't. TSA has no integrity and I wouldn't trust anyone working for TSA. |
Originally Posted by Bonehead
(Post 26814869)
The way I read it, only if you are selected for extra screening for some reason would the proposed law limit your options. The authorities don't want bad guys to be able to opt out of an additional level of scrutiny if they were testing the system in order to see if they could sneak some weapon in.
|
Originally Posted by catocony
(Post 26817118)
This is a major reason someone would want to turn around and just go home. Forcing someone to go through a patdown is actually worse than not allowing someone to leave to go to the bathroom.
When a passenger or bag alarms in screening technology at a TSA checkpoint, the alarm has to be resolved before the passenger can enter the secure area past the checkpoint. Passengers who refuse to complete the screening process can’t be granted access to the secure area. TSA notifies law enforcement when this happens, and law enforcement officers can escort them out of the checkpoint. This isn’t done to punish the passenger– it’s done to ensure that every person who gets on a plane is screened appropriately. Sommer Gentry refused a full-body patdown and was threatened with arrest and a huge fine, but she prevailed and left the airport to return another day. There's a post about this at the TSA News blog BUT there's also malware or a virus there so I'm not going to provide a link to the post. |
Originally Posted by chollie
(Post 26814925)
Yeah, that's the way it's intended to read.
I suspect that it is EXTREMELY rare that someone refuses to complete screening, and I suspect it is even rarer that someone who is being forced to a backroom for a strip search tries to exit the process. Indeed, I would like to see how many times this has happened across the country, except TSA would either say they don't keep track or the information is SSI. |
Can just "see" what happens the first time a child runs away and the parent have to run after. Or a person has to go to the restroom. Or cant stand up and have to sit down.
If this is not going to get police or court to think. What a waste of time/money and energy. |
|
Originally Posted by Section 107
(Post 26819737)
I agree, it doesn't (won't) happen much but it did happen quite notoriously this past March when that Jet Blue FA at LAX ran from secondary and left a couple million dollars worth of coke at the checkpoint. :)
LE did not need this law or anything like it to chase the FA down and arrest her. |
Sommer Gentry refused screening and left checkpoint
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 26817163)
http://blog.tsa.gov/2012/01/passenge...ening-are.html
Sommer Gentry refused a full-body patdown and was threatened with arrest and a huge fine, but she prevailed and left the airport to return another day. There's a post about this at the TSA News blog BUT there's also malware or a virus there so I'm not going to provide a link to the post. The TSA News Blog is safe now. Here's a link to the post mentioned above, detailing how to walk away from the checkpoint after refusing a sexual assault patdown: http://tsanewsblog.com/76/news/how-s...sa-and-say-no/ |
Originally Posted by mybodyismyown
(Post 26901722)
The TSA News Blog is safe now. Here's a link to the post mentioned above, detailing how to walk away from the checkpoint after refusing a sexual assault patdown: http://tsanewsblog.com/76/news/how-s...sa-and-say-no/
|
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 26905434)
As an FYI, Firefox still won't allow access; try Chrome or Edge.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:09 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.