whirledtraveler

That's a shame. RandyP's post was important and it linked to something that was outrageous. It deserved the be the first post in a thread rather than lost in the middle of another one.

Cholula

I appreciate your input...and I suggest discussion such as this be handled via PM or e-mail in the future...but here's my take on the situation:
There have been numerous threads posted in this Forum recently that, IMO, have exhibited little or no difference from one or another. Often posters quote the same basic story from a variety of news sources and we end up here with a lot of disjointed threads discussing the same theme.
I might also suggest that even though posters to this forum have something important/unique to say....as does RandyP...that it's not necessary to start a new thread on the same subject to make his/her point. Anybody interested in the thread subject will see the post, get the point and comment on it if necessary.

_______________________

Cholula

Travel Safety/Security Forum Moderator

RandyP

Sorry about that, Cholula. I only occasionally read this subforum, and I didn't see anything in the past couple of days on this particular story, but thanks for the guidelines.

Mr. Chuck Berry would like to have a word with you.

rubindj

Someone more in the know, tell us about the legal issues. Generally, a federal employee cannot be sued for malfeasence or for civil law violations which happen in the course of their employement. Any suit would be dismissed as per the Federal Tort Claims Act.

There might be some place for a criminal prosecution if the DC police decided to take an interest; however, since it is happening in DC there is a question of whether a federal employee (DC Prosecutor), without the AG's approval, could bring criminal charges against a federal employee...

This whole thing stinks to high heaven, and I would like these idiots to see 2-5 in a penn; however, I'm afraid that our laws may prevent that, unless the Bush administration, etc. agree.

bdschobel

As a former Federal employee, I know something about the lawsuit question. The critical issue will be whether these employees were performing their official duties. Let's look at a couple of REAL examples:

1. A postal employee rapes a woman while delivering mail. Rape is not one of his job responsibilities, so he was charged (and convicted and imprisoned). He had no immunity from prosecution.

2. Lon Horiuchi, an FBI sniper, shoots and kills Vicki Weaver, who is standing behind a door holding her 10-month-old baby, during a standoff involving her husband at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. Idaho charges Horiuchi with manslaughter. The Federal courts dismiss the charge because shooting people is one of Horiuchi's job responsibilities.

The DCA screener case is a tough call. Searching passengers is clearly a job responsibility of these screeners, but stripping them and taking them off to stairwells pretty clearly was not. The TSA may claim immunity, but the courts may not agree. First, of course, we have to decide whether or not a crime was committed. That's not entirely clear to me. Certainly an abuse occurred, but I'm not so sure it was a CRIME.

Bruce

FliesWay2Much

I know I've mentioned it before here, but, in a previous federal civilian job, the big boss (an Assistant Secretary) sent out a letter explaining the advantages of purchasing personal liability insurance for job-related protection. The DoD was even willing to pick up half of the premium up to a top dollar amount.

Dovster

Bruce, there is a difference beyond whether it was part of the job or not. If a soldier is told to rape a woman by his superior officer, it might be part of his job -- but the order would be illegal and the soldier would face criminal charges.

Horiuchi's job might be to shoot people, but that does not give him carte blanche to open fire whenever he feels like it. The shooting would have to be under specific conditions and Horiuchi would have to show that he used reasonable care not to hit a bystander (although, as shown in this case, reasonable care is not always sufficient to avoid a tragedy).

The TSA screener's job is to search people but unless he can show that he had valid reason to exceed the usual bounds of such searches, especially when it comes to touching someone or requiring them to strip, he can, indeed, be arrested.

bdschobel

Yes, I agree. My description of the Horiuchi case was over-simplified. He did, in fact, shoot Vicki Weaver while doing his job -- or at least what his superiors considered doing his job. Most impartial observers believed -- as I do -- that he had no objective reason to shoot her at the moment that he did. She was hardly a threat to anybody -- unless you believe that she was going to hurl her baby at the hundreds of Federal agents who had surrounded their tiny cottage.

Bruce

PatrickHenry1775

I just read this article. We have not become a pathetic country, but a pathetic agency is present in airports. They are more interested in feeling up people than in actually providing security, because tons of unscreened cargo is loaded onto and transported on passenger planes each day. TSA is such a waste of money and effort.

Superguy

Yeah, I've seen them trying to pimp personal umbrella insurance policies at work too.

We didn't get the half premium offer though.

AllanJ

Get more businesses and corporations involved.

Business travelers could select strategic moments to refuse strip searching or unnecessary groping. Occasionally a flight and a business appointment will be missed. Since sexual harassment is not allowed in the workplace and the airport becomes an extension of the workplace during business travel, the employer is now drawn into the problem and has to patch around things which may include purchasing another ticket for the traveller.

Is there a flaw in my argument?

Travel tips:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/travel.htm

But I do feel that it is OK for a passenger to be offered a choice of pat down, strip search, or full body X-ray and be required to make one of those choices.

PoliceStateSurvivor

I am not an attorney and not qualified to give legal advice, but I think public officials can be sued for violations of civil rights in the course of their employement. I believe this was the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration.

PatrickHenry1775

That is correct. However, given the current Supreme Court, Bivens stands a good chance of being overruled. Relatively few opinions cite Bivens. John Gibson of Fox ought to file suit pursuant to Bivens after his recent experience with TSA causing him to miss his flight.

sowalsky

I still really want to see someone from the ACLU or some similar organization handing out pre-filled complaint forms just outside every security chokepoint that a traveler can check a few boxes, fill in the blanks, and mail to the TSA.