videotape a patdown
 

If you were selected for secondary could a member of your party videotape your patdown?

I don't have the answer to that, but I've suggested taking still pictures of a patdown.

Now I just watched NBC Nightly News and their segment on patdowns. Did the agent patting down the woman in the yellow shirt use her palms on the woman's "sensitive" areas? It sure looked like it to me. (Don't look at the Today show video on MSNBC to check - that's a different segment than Nightly News showed.)

Also, a good hint for getting through: wear your pajamas and slippers to the airport, put your clothes through the machine, get them on the other end and go change in the bathroom!!!! Apparently, it's a procedure lots of college kids are using.

---

regarding the older woman (and she was not that much older than I am) who commented to the effect that the search was fine with her because it made flying safer - I just astounds me that people believe that crap. She must have voted for "W".

A sure fire way to
a) miss your flight
b) have a nice face-to-face chat with some 'folks' in a liitle room
c) lose your film and camera
d) make it to The List.

Let us know when/where you intend to do this, I'd like to watch.

Photography of security procedures is an absolute no-no. There may or may not be an actual law saying so, not that that matters.

I wonder if they have the right to stop you. You tell them OK when they are going to secondary you and that your travellig companion will video the event to protect your rights.

Can they stop this?

Only if it actually interferes with the screening process. And I think that it would be a hard argument for that provided you are standing out of the way and you are not setting off your flash on your camera/camcorder.

There were some threads on this a while back. The general consensus from the TSA folks seemed to be that having yourself photographed was OK (the example was in the context of family filming the screening process as part of their vaction home video--weird from a FF point of view but whatever) but that photographing strangers getting secondary was not OK (privacy/humiliation), photographing images on x-ray machines was not OK (privacy of bag owners and/or weak SSI arguments), and photographing screening technology such as working parts of x-rays and ETDs was not OK (SSI arguments).

It also seemed that TSA had told screeners to back off on bugging photographers after some complaints.

I've allowed pat downs to be videotaped and photographed only if they were family and if the person being patted down consented to it. It rarely happens, though.

We've seen enough pictures of pat-downs in the newspapers. Photographing it is legal, or if it is not, it is an easy enough thing to do despite the law.

And on TV, but I expect in both cases, permission was sought and granted beforehand. Given the broad (non-)definition of 'screener interference' you'd be very brave/daring to try it without clearance.

The question is..
 

If you videotape the patdown, and the screener engages in objectionable conduct (objectionable by TSA standards, I mean..) is said screener more likely to be disciplined for their actions?

To add fuel to the fire, consider this page. It's pretty clear that the screener is touching the woman's breasts.. and with the front of her hand.

What are the chances that a person would be allowed to hand over his camera to a stranger to tape his own screening if the stranger agreed? We heard about family members taping each other and such as part of a "here's our trip" but if a person is seriously worried about the actions of the TSA then can they have someone else tape them?

I can see the TSA saying no as it would cause too much a delay. But you would think if your getting a secondary it should be within your rights to request that if someone is willing to tape you being screened, with your own camera, then the TSA should allow this to happen.

And yeah I expect some folks to think "since when did the TSA care about your rights" but I'm serious here. Has any TSA screener who frequents here ever have this asked? Would any TSA screener allow this or even consider it?

Looks to me like the screener is touching the upper chest area and not the breast with the front of her hand which by the SOP is ok

Like with news crews if they get a general picture of a group of people they do not have to have permission, but if it is a single person they have to a signed release to use that person likeness,if the screener refuses to give permission the I would think you would have to stop filming

Ah! Permission!

In another thread, implicit agreement was bandied about. If a screener refused to allow videotaping, could we not then refuse scereening unless the vidoetaping was allowed? You still have my impicit agreement to consent to screening but under my rules (vidoetaped)!

There is no permission required if the videotape is not going to be released to the general public.

That's her chest she's patting, not her breasts. Her breasts are just below the screener's wrist.

Sorry, honey, the palm of her hand is on the top of the woman's breast - in a spot where a doctor would palpate for breast cancer tumors. What kind of lesson in anatomy do you get in training?

Uh uh, that area is part of the chest, not the breast, sorry. The breast is the part that sticks out.

If you wouldn't get away with touching a woman there in a bar you probably shouldn't do it in a public setting such as an airport.

I used to be a forensic technician and cutting open people's chests was a part of my job. Nothing will give you better familiarity with gross anatomy than cracking peoples ribs then removing and weighing their organs. I've had professional anatomical training and the screener in that photo is not putting her palm on the woman's breast. That area is considered the upper chest and the reason doctors also check it during a breast exam is because tumors can spread to other areas of the body.

The problem with analyzing the picture is that it was one snapshot of what was probably a thorough pat-down.
Who knows where the screeners hands/palms/fingers went before or after the picture was taken?

Yes but I believe the debate was over whether the screeners hands were on the woman's breasts in that photo or not. The screeners hands also could not have went anywhere bad either.

I agree. Who knows what happened in that particular incident.
But I guess that's another argument for the title of this thread...

I spoke to the TSA today.
 

Identifying any security official on a film is a bit of a no-no. The way to resolve the issue is by bona fide advocacy or legal action.

I spoke to the TSA today.

They promised to review any 'concerns' and gave me an assurance that promises made by senior diplomats in 2002 would be honoured.

We were given certain assurances in writing in 2002.

That would mean no opposite gender searches & no elective or voluntary OGS either and was to affect all circumstances.

The original scheme (when the TSA first began) was apparently also 'voluntary'. Which was not the way I remember things.

History was re-written a little during my talk with the TSA. My NGO works on sexual slavery and significant abuse issues.

Gregory Carlin

Director

IATC

UK 2890 963164

[email protected]

But if you are going to use it for legal action the it will be available to the public

Still doesn't require permission. In a public place, performing a public function, wouldn't even require permission if it was going to be used in a news broadcast.

Anatomy Lesson
 

Here's your lesson in anatomy.

http://www.drnorthrup.com/hc-breast2.php

Breast tissue extends almost all the way to the clavicle and is not just the part that "sticks out". Therefore, the screener's palms are on the woman's breast.

Gray's Anatomy

Looking at the illustrations here it doesn't look like any hands are on breasts to me. Reading the text I suppose you could call it a gray area but people aren't clones and not everyone has the exact same anatomical structure.

We're not talking about the technical medical definition of breast here and you know it. We're talking about the commonly known perception of the breast, or as GG accurately phrases it "the part the bathing suit covers." This screener is not touching any part of this woman's body that would be covered by an average, normal, everyday modern bathing suit or in other words - the part that sticks out.

Where you people (...sounding like Ross Perot for a second :) ) really screwed up is that you failed to understand that your TSA "textbook" definition of what constitutes a breast or genital doesn't mean a rat's eyelash to a person undergoing a pat-down, especially one for no good reason, such as "continuous screening" or a "random secondary."

You can split hairs all you want. But, if a person believes you touched them in an inappropriate manner, you touched them in an inappropriate manner -- period. You can't make this issue go away.

Problem is, most bathing suits nowadays show a good portion of a female's breasts..

Let's put it this way: if you touched me in this manner I would file a complaint against you.

Now, if you ran the palm of your hand across my upper chest parallel to the floor, that's a different matter.

Well put!

Person's body is private. All of it.

Consider this. Some people choose to cover their faces because of their religious beliefs or to conceal a disfigurement. It is their choice. It must be respected. So face is, in fact, a private area. Clearly, same argument can be applied to touching.

Personally, because of my background and experience, I am very intense about the issues of liberty and privacy. I take exception with any secondary screening unless there is some level of individualized reasonable suspicion. By reasonable suspicion I mean an WTMD alarm, a hard to resolve image on the X-ray, or some other objective, clearly articulated reason. "Hunch" does not count, wearing baggy clothes does not count, flying one way does not count, etc.

Here is another question to ponder. TSA says that pat-downs are necessary to keep bombs off the airplanes. However, they only subject a percentage of people to it. Credibility gap already. Take it one step further. Suppose that a person, selected for seconadary, actually is a terrorist with a bomb. Does anybody seriously think that this person will quietly walk over and submit to secondary screening? More than likely, this person will detonate the bomb right then and there. So, in ortder for this "security measure" to be effective the person suspected of carrying a bomb must by physically restrained. I don't think anybody will agree to that. Airports would be empty.

So, what do the pat-downs really accomplish? IMO, the answer is: "Nothing."

Bravo, PoliceStateSurvivor!

These days I usually fly wearing pajama-like surgical scrubs and thin-soled sandals. This has always gotten me through security quickly (except the one time I got SSSS'ed due to a one-way ticket). The only thing is I'm often asked if I'm a doctor, or if I just got off work. :)