Damaged Indentification
Jun 28, 2010 | 9:33 pm
#31
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,439
When someone asks about potential trouble from TSA when traveling with damaged ID, I would expect your response to be, "No, you won't have any trouble from us, unless you consider answering a few questions and having you and your belongings thoroughly searched for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, to be trouble. You don't need to show us ID in the first place. Doing so is optional. It would just get you through our checkpoint with less scrutiny than we'll give you if you don't have it." That's the case, isn't it?
Jun 28, 2010 | 9:56 pm
#32
Join Date: Dec 2009
Programs: TSO, AS MVP, AOPA member, Private Pilot ASEL
Posts: 571
That's not what you said. You said things like that:
And if someone doesn't "have those specific things"? I keep asking you what it means for someone not to be "good to go", but you still haven't said. In fact, it's not completely clear what "good to go" means. Do you mean that if someone shows you identity credentials with the information you listed, that person will be allowed to proceed?
When someone asks about potential trouble from TSA when traveling with damaged ID, I would expect your response to be, "No, you won't have any trouble from us, unless you consider answering a few questions and having you and your belongings thoroughly searched for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, to be trouble. You don't need to show us ID in the first place. Doing so is optional. It would just get you through our checkpoint with less scrutiny than we'll give you if you don't have it." That's the case, isn't it?
And if someone doesn't "have those specific things"? I keep asking you what it means for someone not to be "good to go", but you still haven't said. In fact, it's not completely clear what "good to go" means. Do you mean that if someone shows you identity credentials with the information you listed, that person will be allowed to proceed?
When someone asks about potential trouble from TSA when traveling with damaged ID, I would expect your response to be, "No, you won't have any trouble from us, unless you consider answering a few questions and having you and your belongings thoroughly searched for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, to be trouble. You don't need to show us ID in the first place. Doing so is optional. It would just get you through our checkpoint with less scrutiny than we'll give you if you don't have it." That's the case, isn't it?
Good to go means exactly that. If I'm at TDC and I have the information I listed on the ID that's being presented, the boarding pass gets stamped and you are on your way, good to go. If you don't have or choose not to present the ID, then additional screening kicks in. That additional screening is done by other officers, not myself.
Jun 28, 2010 | 10:28 pm
#33
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,439
As for your policies and your seeming inability to clearly communicate them to us: If your employer would simply publish the rules passengers are required to follow in order to be allowed to pass your barricade and go on about their business, none of this be necessary.
Exactly what? If you mean "free to go on about your business" or "allowed to pass my podium", then why don't you just say so? When you're telling us how to avoid having our liberties restricted, please cut the folksy crap and just tell us specifically what the rules are.
If I'm at TDC and I have the information I listed on the ID that's being presented, the boarding pass gets stamped and you are on your way, good to go. If you don't have or choose not to present the ID, then additional screening kicks in. That additional screening is done by other officers, not myself.
Originally Posted by mrcav
I will be flying soon from LAX to SFO and my part of my ID is chipped. The part that is chipped didn't contain any information. Do you think that I will have any problems with TSA?
TSO1973, do you disagree?
Jun 28, 2010 | 10:52 pm
#34
Join Date: Dec 2009
Programs: TSO, AS MVP, AOPA member, Private Pilot ASEL
Posts: 571
Yeah, well in that case, the meaning of "is" was not "is"; it was "is or was". It was a poorly-worded question. Clarification was needed. When someone's freedom is at stake, guessing is not a smart thing to do.
As for your policies and your seeming inability to clearly communicate them to us: If your employer would simply publish the rules passengers are required to follow in order to be allowed to pass your barricade and go on about their business, none of this be necessary.
Exactly what? If you mean "free to go on about your business" or "allowed to pass my podium", then why don't you just say so? When you're telling us how to avoid having our liberties restricted, please cut the folksy crap and just tell us specifically what the rules are.
So why did you earlier imply that the passenger must present identity credentials with some particular information on them? Your response was misleading. And why would the OP care which security guard does what?
Mrcav, in that situation, you shouldn't have any problems with TSA. You're not required to show ID in the first place, and a damaged ID is no worse than the lack of any ID. But TSA staff are frequently unfamiliar with their own policies, and TSA would prefer to have people think that showing ID is mandatory, so it's likely that you will experience some trouble. You'd best leave yourself extra time and be ready to deal with some ignorance and power-tripping.
TSO1973, do you disagree?
As for your policies and your seeming inability to clearly communicate them to us: If your employer would simply publish the rules passengers are required to follow in order to be allowed to pass your barricade and go on about their business, none of this be necessary.
Exactly what? If you mean "free to go on about your business" or "allowed to pass my podium", then why don't you just say so? When you're telling us how to avoid having our liberties restricted, please cut the folksy crap and just tell us specifically what the rules are.
So why did you earlier imply that the passenger must present identity credentials with some particular information on them? Your response was misleading. And why would the OP care which security guard does what?
Mrcav, in that situation, you shouldn't have any problems with TSA. You're not required to show ID in the first place, and a damaged ID is no worse than the lack of any ID. But TSA staff are frequently unfamiliar with their own policies, and TSA would prefer to have people think that showing ID is mandatory, so it's likely that you will experience some trouble. You'd best leave yourself extra time and be ready to deal with some ignorance and power-tripping.
TSO1973, do you disagree?
The acceptable ID is required to have certain pieces of information on them. That information was listed by myself and Ari as well. Does presenting the ID at the TDC make things go much easier and smoother? It absolutely does. Is there steps taken in case that ID is either not presented or not acceptable? Yes there are. I never said that ID "must" be presented.
I do disagree with the last statement. It would be highly unlikely that the OP would experience trouble simply because his ID has some damage to it. As I said in my very first reply, we see damaged ID's all the time. As far as the ignorance and the power tripping statement, you're painting a pretty broad stroke with that brush. But you're entitled to your opinion.
Jun 28, 2010 | 11:17 pm
#35
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,439
Understood. You said that if a passenger presents credentials containing certain information the passenger would be "good to go". I repeatedly asked you what it would mean for someone not to be "good to go" but you never said. I think most people would read your initial response to mean, "If you present identity credentials with at least these pieces of information, you will be allowed proceed, and if you do not present such, you will not be allowed to proceed."
Do you think your agency clearly communicates the fact that passengers are not required to "show ID" at your checkpoints?
Jun 28, 2010 | 11:25 pm
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,669
People post from their own prespective.
Mrcav, in that situation, you shouldn't have any problems with TSA. You're not required to show ID in the first place, and a damaged ID is no worse than the lack of any ID. But TSA staff are frequently unfamiliar with their own policies, and TSA would prefer to have people think that showing ID is mandatory, so it's likely that you will experience some trouble. You'd best leave yourself extra time and be ready to deal with some ignorance and power-tripping.
TSO1973 just posted that damaged ID's are acceptable to the TSA as ID-- why would you say that it is "no worse than the lack of any ID" when that is clearly not the case? Not everyone has the time to or wishes to decline to present ID to prove a point-- clearly the OP is happy to present his ID and just wants to know if the TSA will accept a damaged ID. According to your advice, the OP should not bother to present that ID and go through questions and more intense searches. Where do you get off giving advice like this?
I'm starting to understand exactly why the ABQ police grew tiresome of your antics . . . not to say that is justification for arrest in and of itself . . . but I am seeing their side of it right about now . . .
Jun 28, 2010 | 11:40 pm
#37
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
Yes, that's clear.
Okay, so what do you mean by "the acceptable ID"? This thing that people have the option of presenting to you? Of what significance are the things that it is required to have if passengers are not required to have it? Ari quoted related misinformation from your Web site.
Understood. You said that if a passenger presents credentials containing certain information the passenger would be "good to go". I repeatedly asked you what it would mean for someone not to be "good to go" but you never said. I think most people would read your initial response to mean, "If you present identity credentials with at least these pieces of information, you will be allowed proceed, and if you do not present such, you will not be allowed to proceed."
I speak from experience when I say that explaining to a TSA document checker that ID is not required frequently results in such. How do you suppose most of the document checkers you know would act if someone arrived and presented his boarding pass without "acceptable ID"? Do you suppose the doc checker would say, "I need your ID?" When the passenger says, "No, my boarding pass is all I'm required to show you," what do you suppose the reaction would be?
Do you think your agency clearly communicates the fact that passengers are not required to "show ID" at your checkpoints?
Okay, so what do you mean by "the acceptable ID"? This thing that people have the option of presenting to you? Of what significance are the things that it is required to have if passengers are not required to have it? Ari quoted related misinformation from your Web site.
Understood. You said that if a passenger presents credentials containing certain information the passenger would be "good to go". I repeatedly asked you what it would mean for someone not to be "good to go" but you never said. I think most people would read your initial response to mean, "If you present identity credentials with at least these pieces of information, you will be allowed proceed, and if you do not present such, you will not be allowed to proceed."
I speak from experience when I say that explaining to a TSA document checker that ID is not required frequently results in such. How do you suppose most of the document checkers you know would act if someone arrived and presented his boarding pass without "acceptable ID"? Do you suppose the doc checker would say, "I need your ID?" When the passenger says, "No, my boarding pass is all I'm required to show you," what do you suppose the reaction would be?
Do you think your agency clearly communicates the fact that passengers are not required to "show ID" at your checkpoints?
However, I have encountered a situation like yours and the one you describe. It's quiet easy to deal with. A passenger refused to present ID, he wasn't allowed in. And I did not check his BP. Now it didn't happen, but if he would have proceeded past me there is an easy solution. Since I had not checked his BP, i would have had a LEO escort him back out of the checkpoint.
Jun 29, 2010 | 12:12 am
#38
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,669
Jun 29, 2010 | 12:17 am
#39
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
No, not really. I will not physically block someone from walking past me at TDC. But if I haven't checked their BP, it's very simple to deny them entry to the checkpoint - and by that I mean have a LEO escort them back to the non-sterile area. No cans of worms here 
I don't know what happened in phils run-in with TSA. I have seen his, uh, attitude here for some months, and have heard his side of the story, but I don't know why it ended with his arrest. But I wasn't there, so I do not know.
Like I said, I have had one person refuse to show me ID, and it wasn't a big deal. A young man, and he said something like what people on this site say about the ID check. I told him sorry, he couldn't enter, and handed back his BP. And then I called for the next in line. After I processed a few passengers he asked to speak to a STSO.
I explained to the STSO the situation, and she asked the guy if his ID was lost or stolen or missing. He confined he had it, just did nit want to show it. She too told him he couldn't enter, and left. No police called. After I processed a few more passengers he finially showed me his ID and called me a name as he bravely walked into the checkpoint
But as far as this overall thread goes, damaged ID is almost always no problem. Depends on how damaged and what part of the ID is damaged. For almost all passengers, it results in no delays.
I don't know what happened in phils run-in with TSA. I have seen his, uh, attitude here for some months, and have heard his side of the story, but I don't know why it ended with his arrest. But I wasn't there, so I do not know.
Like I said, I have had one person refuse to show me ID, and it wasn't a big deal. A young man, and he said something like what people on this site say about the ID check. I told him sorry, he couldn't enter, and handed back his BP. And then I called for the next in line. After I processed a few passengers he asked to speak to a STSO.
I explained to the STSO the situation, and she asked the guy if his ID was lost or stolen or missing. He confined he had it, just did nit want to show it. She too told him he couldn't enter, and left. No police called. After I processed a few more passengers he finially showed me his ID and called me a name as he bravely walked into the checkpoint
But as far as this overall thread goes, damaged ID is almost always no problem. Depends on how damaged and what part of the ID is damaged. For almost all passengers, it results in no delays.
Last edited by SATTSO; Jun 29, 2010 at 12:32 am
Jun 29, 2010 | 12:36 am
#40
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,439
Which of these do you suppose the OP intended to ask:
- My ID is damaged. Will TSA still allow me to fly?
- My ID is damaged. Should I even bother to show it so that TSA still allow me to slip through security with just a walk through the magnetometer and X-ray of my bags?
I suspect it was #1. The answer is "Yes. You're not required to present a pristine ID or any ID. It might take longer than normal, so plan for some extra time. Also, TSA provides lots of misleading information about their passenger identification policies. Even their staff don't typically know the rules, and those who do will sometimes disregard the rules, and there's not much you can do about it. It might not make any difference at all, because their policies are so unclear and so subject to the whims of whoever is working the document checker podium that day."
The answer to #2 is, "Sure. It can't hurt."
At least once per month, someone comes on TS&S to ask if he or she will be allowed to fly with this ID, that ID, an expired ID, or no ID. The truth (best we can tell from press releases, blog posts, tips for travelers, and redacted documents pried out of our government via FOIA) is that none of that matters. Showing ID just gets you through with less scrutiny.
Right, TSO1973? Passengers who wish to pass through your checkpoint with less scrutiny should show ID, right? You're going to search them less thoroughly if they show ID, and more thoroughly if they do, right?
Of course, this hinges on TSA staff knowing the rules and not acting like power-tripping a......s.
Speaking of which:
Why didn't you allow him in? He didn't break any rules, right? Was it because he didn't tell you his ID was misplaced or stolen? Do you think that his choosing not to show you what you wanted but were not entitled to see indicated that he would present a danger to other passengers on his flight? Did the fact that he did not utter the words "I lost it" indicate that he was dangerous? Had he bent over and kissed your feet, would you have continued to perform the procedure we pay you to perform instead of restricting the man's movement?
Last edited by pmocek; Jun 29, 2010 at 12:42 am
Jun 29, 2010 | 12:59 am
#41
Join Date: May 2008
Location: BOS
Programs: TSA TSO
Posts: 455
Why didn't you allow him in? He didn't break any rules, right? Was it because he didn't tell you his ID was misplaced or stolen? Do you think that his choosing not to show you what you wanted but were not entitled to see indicated that he would present a danger to other passengers on his flight? Did the fact that he did not utter the words "I lost it" indicate that he was dangerous? Had he bent over and kissed your feet, would you have continued to perform the procedure we pay you to perform instead of restricting the man's movement?
That's SOP. You choose not to show ID but are willing to go through the identity verification process and are cleared you can fly.
If you choose not to show ID and refuse to undergo the standard ID verification, you don't fly, simple as that. The man chose at first to restrict his freedom of movement, we weren't restricting it for him.
When someone asks about potential trouble from TSA when traveling with damaged ID, I would expect your response to be, "No, you won't have any trouble from us, unless you consider answering a few questions and having you and your belongings thoroughly searched for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, to be trouble. You don't need to show us ID in the first place. Doing so is optional. It would just get you through our checkpoint with less scrutiny than we'll give you if you don't have it." That's the case, isn't it?
Heh, because that's response you want. Most of the time I accept damaged ID, only a few times have asked for something else because it laminate came off or because it got the normal wallet-rubbing treatment that has that rubbed away data.
Jun 29, 2010 | 1:02 am
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,669
I don't understand what you mean. Showing ID is not required. It seems logical that showing a damaged ID is no worse than not showing any at all, and even neglecting to show any isn't supposed to disqualify someone from flying. So I stand by my assertion that it's no worse than none at all. It's probably better than none at all.
I agree. This person's credentials were damaged and he was concerned about whether he'd be allowed to fly. Of course that won't prevent him from flying. He's not required to have them in the first place.
TSA will accept someone without ID. What sense does it make to ask if they'll accept damaged ID? When someone asks about what sort of ID TSA will accept, it's a pretty good indicator that the person thinks TSA requires passengers to show ID.
I agree. This person's credentials were damaged and he was concerned about whether he'd be allowed to fly. Of course that won't prevent him from flying. He's not required to have them in the first place.
TSA will accept someone without ID. What sense does it make to ask if they'll accept damaged ID? When someone asks about what sort of ID TSA will accept, it's a pretty good indicator that the person thinks TSA requires passengers to show ID.
Why didn't you allow him in? He didn't break any rules, right? Was it because he didn't tell you his ID was misplaced or stolen? Do you think that his choosing not to show you what you wanted but were not entitled to see indicated that he would present a danger to other passengers on his flight? Did the fact that he did not utter the words "I lost it" indicate that he was dangerous? Had he bent over and kissed your feet, would you have continued to perform the procedure we pay you to perform instead of restricting the man's movement?
Jun 29, 2010 | 1:17 am
#43
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,439
Why didn't you allow him in? He didn't break any rules, right? Was it because he didn't tell you his ID was misplaced or stolen? Do you think that his choosing not to show you what you wanted but were not entitled to see indicated that he would present a danger to other passengers on his flight? Did the fact that he did not utter the words "I lost it" indicate that he was dangerous? Had he bent over and kissed your feet, would you have continued to perform the procedure we pay you to perform instead of restricting the man's movement?
On May 27, 2009, I wrote:
The Identity Project recently announced that they have received, via FOIA request placed in July of 2008, a copy of TSA's standard operating procedure as it pertains to attempts to verify passengers' identities prior to their crossing airport checkpoints.
Interestingly, the SOP conflicts with the information published by TSA about their "new" airport ID policy.
IDP writes:
Interestingly, the SOP conflicts with the information published by TSA about their "new" airport ID policy.
IDP writes:
In response to a request by the Identity Project under the Freedom of Information Act, the TSA has for the first time given us a (redacted) version of the section on Travel Document and ID Checks from the TSAs Screening Management SOP (Standard Operating Procedures) manual. Our request was made June 21, 2008, the day the TSA announced what they claimed were changes to ID requirements for air travelers. It took the TSA almost seven months to respond.
The version of the SOP manual which the TSA has now made public is dated June 30, 2008, so it ought to reflect the changes announced in the TSAs June 21, 2008 press release. But there is nothing at all in the sections of the manual the TSA has released about the new procedures and new ID verification form which the TSA had, in fact, started using. Rather than requiring people who dont have or dont choose to show government-issued ID credentials to execute affidavits stating who they are under penalty of perjury, the TSA procedures manual requires that such people be allowed to proceed through secondary screening as selectees, and specifically directs screeners and other TSA staff not to make any attempt to detain or delay them.
The TSA procedures manual states that the Travel Document Checker (TDC) must ask to see each persons travel document. (Travel document appears to be used to mean ticket or confirmation, contrary to the international industry-standard usage of travel document to mean passport or other ID.)
The key words used are ask and request, not demand. The procedures further state:
If the individuals identification documents remain suspect, the STSO [Screening Officer] must notify an LEO [law enforcement officer] for resolution.
Screening of the individual may proceed while waiting for an LEO response. If an LEO fails to respond within established airport timeframes, the STSO must process the individual as a selectee. If the individual clears selectee screening, do not attempt to detain or delay the individual from entering the sterile area for the purpose of obtaining LEO clearance.
Individuals who appear to be 18 years of age or older with a valid travel document, but without an ID, or in possession of an invalid ID, must be designated and screened as a selectee.
Any detention, search, or interrogation by a law enforcement officer, of course, would be subject to well-established legal standards for warrant, probable cause, or sufficent basis for suspicion.
The other key word in the phrase ask to see in the procedures is see, which would require only that you allow visual inspection of your documents. Theres nothing in the procedures requiring or authorizing the TDC to demand that you surrender possession or physical control of your documents, although in fact they often demand that you give them your documents and let go of them yourself.
Contrary to TSA claims to have firm legal authority for their ID checking and other screening practices, this section of the TSA SOP manual suggests that the TSA knows that their authority is limited, and in particular does not extend to detention, general-puprose search, confiscation of documents, or compelled responses to interrogatories.
These are procedures, mind you. Not policies. Not regulations. Not laws. Congress has never debated or approved any of this, nor has any judge or jury. The excerpts from the TSA manual that we received gave little hint of how much discretion the TSA thinks it has, or gives its minions at individual airports or checkpoints, to use nonstandard procedures if they feel like it.
If youre going to be trying to fly without showing ID credentials, or without ones that the TSA finds acceptable, you might want to carry a copy of the procedures manual, to remind the TSA that they arent supposed to detain or delay you. If you do, please let us know how it goes.
The version of the SOP manual which the TSA has now made public is dated June 30, 2008, so it ought to reflect the changes announced in the TSAs June 21, 2008 press release. But there is nothing at all in the sections of the manual the TSA has released about the new procedures and new ID verification form which the TSA had, in fact, started using. Rather than requiring people who dont have or dont choose to show government-issued ID credentials to execute affidavits stating who they are under penalty of perjury, the TSA procedures manual requires that such people be allowed to proceed through secondary screening as selectees, and specifically directs screeners and other TSA staff not to make any attempt to detain or delay them.
The TSA procedures manual states that the Travel Document Checker (TDC) must ask to see each persons travel document. (Travel document appears to be used to mean ticket or confirmation, contrary to the international industry-standard usage of travel document to mean passport or other ID.)
The key words used are ask and request, not demand. The procedures further state:
If the individuals identification documents remain suspect, the STSO [Screening Officer] must notify an LEO [law enforcement officer] for resolution.
Screening of the individual may proceed while waiting for an LEO response. If an LEO fails to respond within established airport timeframes, the STSO must process the individual as a selectee. If the individual clears selectee screening, do not attempt to detain or delay the individual from entering the sterile area for the purpose of obtaining LEO clearance.
Individuals who appear to be 18 years of age or older with a valid travel document, but without an ID, or in possession of an invalid ID, must be designated and screened as a selectee.
The other key word in the phrase ask to see in the procedures is see, which would require only that you allow visual inspection of your documents. Theres nothing in the procedures requiring or authorizing the TDC to demand that you surrender possession or physical control of your documents, although in fact they often demand that you give them your documents and let go of them yourself.
Contrary to TSA claims to have firm legal authority for their ID checking and other screening practices, this section of the TSA SOP manual suggests that the TSA knows that their authority is limited, and in particular does not extend to detention, general-puprose search, confiscation of documents, or compelled responses to interrogatories.
These are procedures, mind you. Not policies. Not regulations. Not laws. Congress has never debated or approved any of this, nor has any judge or jury. The excerpts from the TSA manual that we received gave little hint of how much discretion the TSA thinks it has, or gives its minions at individual airports or checkpoints, to use nonstandard procedures if they feel like it.
If youre going to be trying to fly without showing ID credentials, or without ones that the TSA finds acceptable, you might want to carry a copy of the procedures manual, to remind the TSA that they arent supposed to detain or delay you. If you do, please let us know how it goes.
And by "accept damaged ID" you mean "allow someone to pass through the security checkpoint with reduced scrutiny as a result of his presentation of damaged identity credentials," right? Do think that makes anyone any safer?
Jun 29, 2010 | 10:08 am
#44
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,439
SATTSO's behavior was about gaining compliance, not ensuring safety
Why didn't you allow him in? He didn't break any rules, right? Was it because he didn't tell you his ID was misplaced or stolen? Do you think that his choosing not to show you what you wanted but were not entitled to see indicated that he would present a danger to other passengers on his flight? Did the fact that he did not utter the words "I lost it" indicate that he was dangerous? Had he bent over and kissed your feet, would you have continued to perform the procedure we pay you to perform instead of restricting the man's movement?
SATTSO did not describe the man refusing to undergo the identity verification process TSA claims its staff use when people do not present identity credentials, only the man refusing to present identity credentials. Did I read this correctly, SATTSO?
The man was not required to present those credentials to you in order to go on about his business, was he? You retaliated by prohibiting him from crossing your barricade simply because his stated reason for not presenting identity credentials was his desire not to do so, right? Had the situation been exactly the same, except for three words out of the man's mouth -- "I lost it" or "it was stolen" -- you would not have immediately infringed upon his right to travel, would you? There was no specific security threat nor any unlawful behavior in that case, just you, an airport security guard, teaching someone the consequences of exercising his rights, correct?
SATTSO, even if you respond to nothing else in this thread, please explain to us what, if anything, made you think this man was such a threat to transportation security that you should bar him from walking through the airport to the terminal from which he presumably arranged to be transported. Please don't reply by citing internal procedures you won't allow us to read, just tell us why you -- TSA -- felt it was appropriate to infringe upon that man's right to move from one place to another.
Ari, I know I'm treading on thin ice with you, but is this the sort of behavior on the part of our government that you want to see? I believe that the more passengers, as a whole, voluntarily show ID, the more totalitarian behavior like SATTSO's is likely to be imposed on people who have done nothing wrong. The least we can do is make people aware of their rights and responsibilities in the face of TSA's misinformation and their staff's despicable behavior. I'll continue to do so. I hope you'll join me.
Jun 29, 2010 | 10:44 am
#45
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
If he had lost his ID or had his wallet stolen, which does happen (ive had my wallet stolen/lost on a trip ) we would verify identity another way. If someone refuses to show ID they obviously refuse to verify their ID by other means. I didn't think I needed to say that before, but it seems Phil needs that spelled out for him, as evidenced when he said about LoganTSOs post:
"That's not the situation SATTSO described."
as it was the situation i described. Sorry, phil, for the confusion.
) we would verify identity another way. If someone refuses to show ID they obviously refuse to verify their ID by other means. I didn't think I needed to say that before, but it seems Phil needs that spelled out for him, as evidenced when he said about LoganTSOs post:"That's not the situation SATTSO described."
as it was the situation i described. Sorry, phil, for the confusion.