Abuse of Passengers by TSA
 

http://tsaabusestory.blogspot.com/20...pect-when.html

There was also a great interview with Yukari Mihamae this morning here:

http://www.KGNU.org/shows.php

"Morning Magazine" show. Interview begins at 1hr mark. I feel sorry for people who suffer anxiety/panic attacks who have to travel. There are a lot of people who are afraid to travel now because of the TSA.

TSa Abuse story from the first post has a sworn statement that was faxed to the Phoenix PD.

I just loved the PD's attitude that they don't take sexual assault complaints if the criminal is a TSO.

I want a video of the police chief trying to explain that one to a bunch of TV cameras.

Thought about this, and here's where this entire process breaks down (in general). Consider the perspective of an LEO or prosecutor, when they hear this story:

I went to a bar (airport), and attempted to enter the property. I was told that to enter, I had to submit to a physical search, yet was not told the details of what that would entail. I was told that I could stop the search at any time, and I could stop the attempt to enter the bar (airport). I consented to a search, they touched my penis five times, yet I didn't stop them after the first time, leave the premises, or talk to a law enforcement officer. I did not stop the search, or attempt to leave. They then told me I had failed a test, and had to have another physical search, and they touched my penis another five times. I then passed the physical inspection, entered the property, and had a drink (flew a plane). A few hours later, I've decided to request a written police report, to press charges, for sexual assault.

If you are told you can just walk away, and you don't just walk away, can any law enforcement or prosecutors jump in, and tell us how you'd react to that story?

The airport is the way many people get to work. It's not in the same category as going out for a drink.

Can you turn around when you get to the airport screening? It's not entirely clear that you can do it with no consequences.

When you're on your way to work, can you turn around and go home? i suppose so, but as a practical matter....it's not so straight-forward.

We have been told that once we place our bags on the xray we must complete the screening process or we will be fined/arrested/placed on a watch list...how is the airport the same as a bar? :confused:

We aren't slaves, and we aren't indentured servants, at least not legally. Financially, we might be, yet that's another thread. Legally, if my employer says "fly or quit", there's nothing legally forcing me to fly. I'm not legally forced to meet my employee obligations, I have a choice, no matter how unfavorable that choice might be.

That was the impression I got from the Pistole testimony to Congress, when the enhanced pat-down started. At any time, you can just stop the process, collect your belonging, and walk away. If it's the start of the process, just walk away. If it's the middle of the process, an LEO could be called to verify you are not a threat to yourself or others, and escorted out. You could be administrative fined, and the LEO could arrest you for disturbing the peace, yet the search can stop.

Civil rights, and practicality, are sometimes mutually exclusive?

My impression is that if you stop mid-search, it turns from an administrative search to a law enforcement search (which has a lot more controls wrapped around that). Yet the search is limited to the safety of yourself and others, then you are ejected.

The point of my example was... how would the officer or prosecutor treat the incident. It might not have been the best analogy, yet it was the best I could come up with, at that time.

Bolding mine.

And my reply - BALONEY.

Civil rights are ALWAYS eminently practical; in fact, they are the very definition of practicality and civilization. Anyone who purports differently is merely using a plattitude to justify stripping civil rights from people whom he cares less about than his motivation for the strippage.

^^^

Bravo. I should have chosen my word more carefully, and you have a valid point.

Someone once told me... all things are simple, people make things complicated.

The fact that such a large percentage of air travel passengers can't (or don't? or won't?) just turn around and walk away is more a judgment of passengers then air travel.

Why is it that large percentages of passengers aren't just... turning around and walking away?

I suspect because there is not a reasonable alternative. The majority that do have a reasonable alternative have already opted for such and don't even appear at an airport. For those others that have an issue with the atrocious security, but show up, have very little option. Most probably due to time constraints and a variety of other criteria. Trains are more comfortable, but not fast. Driving either requires a rental car(can cost more than a plane ticket) or a personal auto in good enough shape for the trips, but are still much slower.

Consider a family trying to go on vacation to Disney World from Denver. That's a 30 hr. drive straight through, with kids in the car. That will be a 2-3 day drive just getting there, 2-3 back. That is no longer a weekend vacation to Wally World.

The $11,000 fine threatened for doing so might be a reason. TSA routinely threatens people with administrative fines if they don't "complete screening", so they shut up and deal with it.

Your earlier point about quitting one's job is easily addressed. If you sexually harass your secretary, who cares? She can quit, right?

Agree. It's a bit like deciding to give up a car for public transportation. It can require an entire lifestyle change - job requirements, family location, not to mention discretionary travel.

If, like most folks, you work and have limited vacation, then even if the job doesn't require air travel, vacation opportunities get pretty restricted if you don't include air travel. If family is spread out around the country, well, time limitations often preclude anything but air travel (especially if some of your family lives in HI).

I think older folks,particularly retired, are more likely to be giving up air travel right now. Other folks are (time permitting), cutting back, even for work. We see folks post that they now drive instead of fly for anything under 'x' hours.

The younger generation doesn't know anything different. This is life in the US today. You can be stopped virtually anywhere at any time and asked who you are and where you are going - and in some cases, you may have to prove your identity and citizenship - difficult to do without 'papers'. They see/hear about sexting and child molestation. Those who fly are being taught from a young age that this is the norm at the airport: you present papers, sometimes multiple times to multiple people, you present your bags and your person for scrutiny and you have no recourse. The kids are growing up thinking it is normal.

Agreed! To say travelers have a choice is just a way to deflect from the real issue, and is insulting.

Then we, as a society, have built our own prison, by the actions of our past. We've voluntarily put ourselves into a situation that mandates the least preferable choice. We can grow, change, and evolve, or we can keep building the walls taller around us.

Sorry, can't link the two scenarios.

Only by those children who's parents permit or enable this behavior pattern from their kids.

First, you are correct. Some travelers do not have a choice (eg: HI). The scope of my thoughts are limited to those that do (eg: DTW-CHI, NYC-LAX, etc). Second, what is the real issue, and how do we address this real issue? The issue, imo, appears to be a lack of ownership on the part of the pax regarding their own society, government, etc, and how to produce productive and healthy change.

I can not think of a single legal reason that someone can be compelled to fly (unless it's con-air, yet that's not within the scope of the discussion). And if we permit 5 instances to occur, of what we individually perceive to be an illegal activity, and we don't take action on the 1st event, especially if we've been told that this event is voluntary, then we, the pax, have some ownership. Everyone in this drama has ownership, yet I believe that the pax isn't taking as much ownership as they should be. This by no means is a statement that the TSA has any less ownership, yet it's time for the pax to take more ownership. IMO. :)