The ORD grope video, coupled with all the other instances of TSA making a stink about videotaping (or videoNANDflashstoragedevicing) at checkpoints got me thinking - assuming that one is at an airport without statutory prohibitions against recording/photography, what could one expect if one requested out loud that someone else at the checkpoint record their gropedown?

I'm making a few assumptions in this case that I'm hoping shouldn't matter too much, but I'll state them to be sure:
-Assume the pax is traveling alone or with a companion who does not have a recording device.
-Assume the pax does not have his/her own recording device to lend to another pax
-Assume the pax has not been bullied into a private room(1)
-Assume that baggage X-ray and/or cancertron screens are not within view
-Assume the pax has a reasonable amount of time to catch his/her flight and is not skin-of-teething their trip through Checkpoint Charlie.

The reason I ask is that I've heard TSOs say that they forbid videography (even though TSA officially does doesn't does doesn't does doesn't...) because they're protecting the privacy of the groping victim. "You can't videotape without the consent of the person being screened." By publically announcing your desire to be recorded (and, if you can work it in, requesting people who have Qik/Ustream accounts) that pretty much blows that argument out of the water.

I can think of a few issues that would likely come up and I'm hoping we can get some clarification on what to expect:

-TSOs lie, we know this. It's reasonable to expect that they'd claim their monitors are being recorded (even when they plainly aren't) and that people must therefore cease recording immediately. How do we counter this? If it's 25 people all recording at once, sheer numbers make it more or less a moot point. If it's just one or two, it may be trickier to get the TSO to back down.

-Other pax, be they kettles or just people who are mistaken about photography and its legal status, may interfere and say that recording isn't allowed. Same mentality as the guy who said "You're supposed to freeze" during Code Bravo Freeze Tag. How would one get around this? Reasonably we could just ignore those people but if they're AFSers who freak easily, they may call the police. This would be another case where strength in numbers would be useful but it'd still be potentially problematic, especially if the LEO is a rookie and/or sides with TSA.

Questions, answers, and any other thoughts/ideas on this are welcome.

(1) Has it been established that recording is permitted in the private room, or am I mistaken about that?

I'd estimate your chances of getting a complete stranger to participate in your interaction with the TSA workers to be roughly zero.

Unless it's a FT campaigner like <name redacted> .

I suspect plenty of people on here would point a camera so long as they had the time and the equipment.

Statutory prohibitions against videotaping in public places are unconstitutional.

Do you mean practically, or as a matter of law?

That is contrary to law. There is no expectation of privacy in a public place, and of of the justifications for the 4th Amendment exception to the airport administrative search is that it be performed publicly.

There are no legal arguments in support of prohibiting videotaping.

By calmly explaining that the TSO is mistaken as to the law, and then ignoring him.


If it's 25 people all recording at once, sheer numbers make it more or less a moot point. If it's just one or two, it may be trickier to get the TSO to back down.

-Other pax, be they kettles or just people who are mistaken about photography and its legal status, may interfere and say that recording isn't allowed. Same mentality as the guy who said "You're supposed to freeze" during Code Bravo Freeze Tag. How would one get around this? Reasonably we could just ignore those people but if they're AFSers who freak easily, they may call the police. This would be another case where strength in numbers would be useful but it'd still be potentially problematic, especially if the LEO is a rookie and/or sides with TSA.[/quote]If the LEO sides with TSA, they are not following the law. Explain to them calmly that the law permits videotaping in public.

Don't go to the private room. Period.

Count me in! ^

I probably wouldn't scream out "Could someone please record this with their cell phone??" But, since my phone is running the whole time I am there, I would happily pick it up when it's accessible and aim it at someone else's grope if they called out for that kind of help.

I would also voluntarily record a grope without someone calling for it, and of course I would offer to give it to them. I wouldn't post it or share it without their consent, but that's just me.

Tell that to MA where it's illegal without consent from all parties.

No, seriously. Tell them.

Have you a cite to the statute?

I'd like to see that too. Do all of the Red Sox and Pats fans on their way to and from the stadium sign waivers? I see them on TV all the time.

Yep, I would be happy to assist.

I have put FT tags on my carry on. If you see me, just ask.

At one point in time, yes. TSA released instruction about that sometime between yesterday and last sunday, which I just learned about today.

My interpretation of it, and the Bald Guy in the Suit's interpretation of it as well, has been put down.

It is now generally not permitted.

Hi, HSVTSO Dean,

Can you tell me (assuming it's not SSI -- I don't want you to risk your job), what happens when someone refuses to go to a private room? I've never had to have a resolution pat down, but I am convinced of the unconstitutionality of requiring I go to a private room and have no intention of doing so.

Oh, I couldn't imagine it being SSI.

If a particular screening process requires a private screening, and the passenger out-and-out refuses to do it, then it qualifies as their refusing to undergo the screening process. It doesn't matter that they would agree to do it so long as it's done in the public area -- the procedure of the particular process requires a private screening.

If the screening process can't be completed, then the passenger can't be allowed entrance into the sterile area.

There is something absolutely wrong with this, being forced to go into a private room just to be able to travel. What about a witness? Fellow traveller? LEO? Why can't I videotape, or have videotaped, the process? What does TSA have to hide?

No way in Hades would I ever go into a private room with these people, especially with no recourse to protecting myself. Don't want to fly? Fine, I'll get to the gate another way. Don't think I can? You'll see.

You *&$^ with people long enough, and you'll have a revolution on your hands.

If you want. You do have the right to a witness of your choosing to accompany you.* It even says so right on the sign at the entrance to the private screening room.

* - Assuming they want to. If you just pick some random person and they don't want to do it, we can't force them to be a witness for you.