FlyerTalk Forums
Page 24 of 41
« First
14
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
34
Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues-686/)
-   -   Strip Seach Question (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-security-issues/1226601-strip-seach-question.html)

T-the-B Jun 22, 2011 11:59 am
Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 16606560)

So I know this - people on this site are complaining about the private screening room, yet more passengers ask for it than complain. So do you think, if what I told you is true, that its going to go away?
Will this issue (the debate over private screening) go away? It all depends on one other question. Is the private screening optional or mandatory? If it is optional, then it makes sense to assume that it is offered for the convenience or peace of mind of the passenger. If it is mandatory then it is being done so that TSA can keep what happens out of the public eye.

So, which is it? May a passenger refuse private screening?

PTravel Jun 22, 2011 12:02 pm
Originally Posted by Fredd (Post 16606471)
To a non-lawyer like me it seems ironic, odd and of course unpleasant if an administrative search to get on a plane (or train, or whatever is next) is allowed to be more invasive than a typical probable-cause search.
I agree completely. I think that AIT and opt-out pat downs are unconstitutional. However, I'm not a judge -- we'll see what the courts say.

doober Jun 22, 2011 12:08 pm
Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 16606598)
For deliberately being obtuse, welcome to the ignore list, Phil. :)
Speaking of not being able to take it. :D

tanja Jun 22, 2011 12:26 pm
TSA says they dont grope or touch any "private" areas at all. They just kind of "glide over them !?

How does that clear an object in the genitals and breasts area?

It can be placed so the only way is to grope, touch and/or visual view.

And to say they are not doing above and that the pax cant travel.
That is a really to control what people do in their lives.

Global_Hi_Flyer Jun 22, 2011 12:38 pm
Originally Posted by billycorgan (Post 16606726)
I am under the belief, perhaps mistakenly that passengers have and could be required to remove articles of clothing down to their underwear in order to be cleared to fly. A TSO may not be able to require them to do so, but they maybe be forced to if they want to be cleared through security, the choice is up to the passenger obviously, they could decline and not fly.
And to be clear, under the TSA policies that have become known, a passenger that declines and chooses not to fly may well be turned over to law enforcement for further investigation and interrogation, and (should the TSA's statement be deemed "probably cause") may well be subject to the kind of invasive search that the passenger was trying to avoid.

Catch 22.

I've observed it before. Back before shoe removal was mandatory, I was stopped from going through a WTMD with very thin loafers (no metal). Screener told me that shoe removal was required. When I pointed out that TSA policy was otherwise if the shoes didn't set off a WTMD, that same screener said "Yes you can wear the shoes, but if you do you will be automatically chosen for a secondary inspection where you WILL have to take off shoes". They pulled a woman wearing flip-flops for secondary when she didn't take them off.

InkUnderNails Jun 22, 2011 12:55 pm
I may need to adjust my meds, but SATTSO is beginning to make sense. Without getting into the constitutionality and whether it is right or wrong to do the "Pat Downs," this is how I interpret what SATTSO has said (he is welcome to correct any misstatement):
  1. If someone comes through security whether by AIT or WTMD and generates no alarms and their bag clears the x-ray operator and the ETD machine, they are cleared into the sterile area (except for the random which may or not be rare).
  2. If there is an alarm in any of these four locations: AIT, WTMD, X-ray, or ETD it must be resolved.
  3. The x-ray, ETD resolution may include hand searches, re-running the bag etc. and additional ETD. If the source of the alarm is found and cleared the passenger is allowed into the secure area. This will be the case in the vast majority of cases.
  4. If the alarm or anomaly is found at the AIT or WTMD, a pat-down to determine the cause of alarm will occur. If it can be resolved without the removal of clothes, the passenger will be cleared into the sterile area.
  5. If something is felt in the pat down that requires the removal of clothes to resolve, the passenger at his or her discretion can elect to remove the necessary clothing, remove the item for inspection or voluntarily leave the check point and not proceed to the sterile area.
  6. Anyone that opts out of the AIT will get a similar search to one done to someone that has alarmed the AIT except that a specific area can not be searched and the body search must include the whole body. The process for clothes removal or not is virtually identical.

Bottom line: The passenger will not be required to submit to a strip search. However, it may be necessary for them to voluntarily remove clothing to resolve an anomaly and gain access to the secure area.

Restated: If you want to fly, you may have to voluntarily take off at least part of your clothes.

exbayern Jun 22, 2011 1:03 pm
Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 16606560)
I doubt you will believe me, but here goes... then I have to leave, busy day ahead.

When AIT and the new pat downs were coming out (at different times), we heard a lot from above about passenger privacy, and how we needed to protect it.

Specifically, the argument was made that some/many passengers might be uncomfortable receiving this pat down in public (for years we received many comment cards where people complained various procedures were done in public, and it made the passenger feel like a criminal - even for bag checks, yes bag checks). So to make it more comfortable for the passenger, this pat down would be done in private.

Now, I know here on this site there are stories that if you go into the private room, that is where TSA employees really start to abuse you, do all sorts of horrible things to you and such...

But I can honestly tell you this: more passengers go into private screening rooms at THEIR OWN request, than for us offering it. We are REQUIRED to offer it for the SPD, but you would be surprised, over a day/week, how many people ask it for their bag checks and such. It actually makes sense, in a way, people carry "private" things in their bag - underpants and expensive jewelry and such, that they want as few people to see as possible.

So I know this - people on this site are complaining about the private screening room, yet more passengers ask for it than complain. So do you think, if what I told you is true, that its going to go away?
I doubt that you read my lengthy post about security in India, but there ALL female airport searches are done in a curtained booth (as well as 'other' security around the country, such as that found at some higher end hotels)

I have no issue with the mandatory private screening in India for women.

There is one female screener who does a very basic pat down, and uses a wand. There is no lifting of skirts, no lunges, no touching of bare skin. There is courtesy, and there is respect.

I would however be extremely hesitant to ever go to a TSA private screening. From what I understand, there are two TSOs. My experience with female TSOs is that many are rude and harsh. Based on the experiences I have had at TSA checkpoints whilst in the public eye, I would not want to have an experience in private. I just cannot trust what may happen.

So, in my case I have two opportunities to regularly pass through airport checkpoints which offer or require a private screening. The one which requires a private screening offers me a polite, pain free experience with no humiliation. The one which offers a private screening has left me in pain, feeling humiliation, and often spoken to as if I am an animal and not a passenger.

There is a significant difference here, and hopefully readers can understand that.

TheGolfWidow Jun 22, 2011 1:18 pm
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 16607570)
Restated: If you want to fly, you may have to voluntarily take off at least part of your clothes.
That's what I'm getting. You will voluntarily submit to "some stuff" as a condition of flying. But, just what "some stuff" really consists of is not something that can be known until after you have paid for the ticket, boarded the dog, parked the car, checked your bags, presented your passport, tossed your belongings on the conveyor belt, and followed some employee to a back room.

tanja Jun 22, 2011 1:20 pm
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 16607570)
I may need to adjust my meds, but SATTSO is beginning to make sense. Without getting into the constitutionality and whether it is right or wrong to do the "Pat Downs," this is how I interpret what SATTSO has said (he is welcome to correct any misstatement):
  1. If someone comes through security whether by AIT or WTMD and generates no alarms and their bag clears the x-ray operator and the ETD machine, they are cleared into the sterile area (except for the random which may or not be rare).
  2. If there is an alarm in any of these four locations: AIT, WTMD, X-ray, or ETD it must be resolved.
  3. The x-ray, ETD resolution may include hand searches, re-running the bag etc. and additional ETD. If the source of the alarm is found and cleared the passenger is allowed into the secure area. This will be the case in the vast majority of cases.
  4. If the alarm or anomaly is found at the AIT or WTMD, a pat-down to determine the cause of alarm will occur. If it can be resolved without the removal of clothes, the passenger will be cleared into the sterile area.
  5. If something is felt in the pat down that requires the removal of clothes to resolve, the passenger at his or her discretion can elect to remove the necessary clothing, remove the item for inspection or voluntarily leave the check point and not proceed to the sterile area.
  6. Anyone that opts out of the AIT will get a similar search to one done to someone that has alarmed the AIT except that a specific area can not be searched and the body search must include the whole body. The process for clothes removal or not is virtually identical.

Bottom line: The passenger will not be required to submit to a strip search. However, it may be necessary for them to voluntarily remove clothing to resolve an anomaly and gain access to the secure area.

Restated: If you want to fly, you may have to voluntarily take off at least part of your clothes.
And again the necessary for them to remove clothing to resolve an anomaly issue.

What if is under the undies?
We just told that will not happen! So how do they then resolve it?
If they "dont" grope or fondle the area?

4nsicdoc Jun 22, 2011 1:28 pm
Originally Posted by Bart (Post 16584511)

By the way, do you believe in Jesus Christ as your personal savior? Do you believe that there's life on other planets? Do you believe in ghosts? Do you believe in Santa Claus? Do you believe that Bill Clinton never inhaled?
So now the thread has derailed to one on superstitions, aliens, ghosts, fairy tales and drugs. The one reason I am inclined to believe the OP is the total consistency with behaviors in the time of war. No one can doubt that the TSA has declared war on the American traveling public. It is very common that an aggressor in the time of war will intentionally, rape, molest or otherwise try to humiliate his or her opponent, or the non-combatants who are perceived as being allied with that enemy. "Women have been ravished in Zion, and virgins in the towns of Judah." Hebrew Scriptures, Lamentations 5:11. It happened in Bosnia. It is reportedly happening now in Libya.
It has been estimated that Iraqi soldiers raped at least 5,000 Kuwaiti women during Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. As many as 500,000 women and girls were either raped or molested in Rwanda.
It is a weapon of terror now being wielded by those who, after swearing to upphold the Constitution, are defiling it daily.
I suppose it was justified by those at Abu Ghraib as being consistent with America's best interests in a time of war.
And a further common thread is that Hazim Delic, Zdravko Mucic, and Esad Landzo, when accused of the systematic rape and molestation of Muslim women during the Bosnian War said, "It didn't happen." Actually they said, "To se nije dogodilo."
Sounds familiar.

billycorgan Jun 22, 2011 1:31 pm
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 16607570)
I may need to adjust my meds, but SATTSO is beginning to make sense. Without getting into the constitutionality and whether it is right or wrong to do the "Pat Downs," this is how I interpret what SATTSO has said (he is welcome to correct any misstatement):
  1. If someone comes through security whether by AIT or WTMD and generates no alarms and their bag clears the x-ray operator and the ETD machine, they are cleared into the sterile area (except for the random which may or not be rare).
  2. If there is an alarm in any of these four locations: AIT, WTMD, X-ray, or ETD it must be resolved.
  3. The x-ray, ETD resolution may include hand searches, re-running the bag etc. and additional ETD. If the source of the alarm is found and cleared the passenger is allowed into the secure area. This will be the case in the vast majority of cases.
  4. If the alarm or anomaly is found at the AIT or WTMD, a pat-down to determine the cause of alarm will occur. If it can be resolved without the removal of clothes, the passenger will be cleared into the sterile area.
  5. If something is felt in the pat down that requires the removal of clothes to resolve, the passenger at his or her discretion can elect to remove the necessary clothing, remove the item for inspection or voluntarily leave the check point and not proceed to the sterile area.
  6. Anyone that opts out of the AIT will get a similar search to one done to someone that has alarmed the AIT except that a specific area can not be searched and the body search must include the whole body. The process for clothes removal or not is virtually identical.

Bottom line: The passenger will not be required to submit to a strip search. However, it may be necessary for them to voluntarily remove clothing to resolve an anomaly and gain access to the secure area.

Restated: If you want to fly, you may have to voluntarily take off at least part of your clothes.
That is exactly my understanding also.

Which is why it is important to know if RPD's can be done in public. Bottom line you may have to remove clothing during an RPD if you want to fly.

They are essentially giving you the choice between stripping or not flying/speaking with an LEO.

Also while SATTSO did state that they can not ask you to remove any clothing covering private areas, basically they force you into volunteering to.

I am wondering if they require the volunteer removal of undergarments also as a condition of resolving an alarm.. It is reasonable to believe if they "require you to volunteer" to remove pants and shirts it would stand to reason that they require you to remove bras/panties/underwear/

TheGolfWidow Jun 22, 2011 1:32 pm
Originally Posted by tanja (Post 16607752)
And again the necessary for them to remove clothing to resolve an anomaly issue.

What if is under the undies?
We just told that will not happen! So how do they then resolve it?
If they "dont" grope or fondle the area?
This is the same sort of question I was asking earlier -- How is it that looking at a genital piercing through underwear is going to tell them that it won't take down the plane when touching it through clothing doesn't? It makes no sense. :confused:

tanja Jun 22, 2011 1:41 pm
Originally Posted by TheGolfWidow (Post 16607819)
This is the same sort of question I was asking earlier -- How is it that looking at a genital piercing through underwear is going to tell them that it won't take down the plane when touching it through clothing doesn't? It makes no sense. :confused:
They can not.
So it just a bunch of lies.

Even the thinest undies cant show that piercing is the cause of the alarm.

They have to visually see it. They dont want to do that. And you get arrested.

Or they have to grope,finger,chop and you name it ,to you.

And they have told us they dont do that.
So what is left.

Not hat I have that. But maybe others have piercing like this.
It is just sick.
And I dont think we are going to get an honset answer.

VegasCableGuy Jun 22, 2011 2:10 pm
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 16607570)
I may need to adjust my meds, but SATTSO is beginning to make sense. Without getting into the constitutionality and whether it is right or wrong to do the "Pat Downs," this is how I interpret what SATTSO has said (he is welcome to correct any misstatement):
...
    ...
    Bottom line: The passenger will not be required to submit to a strip search. However, it may be necessary for them to voluntarily remove clothing to resolve an anomaly and gain access to the secure area.
    I don't think what SATTSO is saying in reference to this point is quite, um, realistic. We've heard many times that leaving the screening process once it has begun it not permitted. It's claimed that terr'sts would try to smuggle a weapon through over and over again, leaving each time it was detected and then getting back in line to try again until they succeed. Thus, the "$11,000 fine" for leaving the screening without resolution. This talk of lawsuits and fines goes back a couple of years now. There's even talk of arrest (but I haven't a clue what for).

    Bloghdad Bob says implementation of the fine is up to their own discretion, so your mileage may vary. However, I think it would be safe to say that someone with an unresolved object in their pants will probably not be given the opportunity to wander off and come back to try again. SATTSO might be nice enough to let you go, but I don't think the others will.

    TheGolfWidow Jun 22, 2011 2:20 pm
    So.....

    "You can voluntarily show us your underwear or you can voluntarily go home to await for the bill for $11,000 if you decide you don't really want to fly today after all."


    All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:06 pm.
    Page 24 of 41
    « First
    14
    18
    19
    20
    21
    22
    23
    24
    25
    26
    27
    28
    29
    30
    34
    Last »
    Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


    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.