Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Outrageous Behaviour by TSA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 1:00 pm
  #31  
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: HP/US Gold, Hilton Gold, Starwood Gold
Posts: 711
Originally Posted by n198ua
Thank you to those of you who responded appropriately. I appreciate all the input. Since I'm an on-air meteorologist I don't think I want to draw any media attention to myself, but I will be drafting the appropriate letters w/in the next couple of days. I also want to be clear that I loathe the fact that we have become a litigation-happy nation, the only reason I even considered legal procedures was for safety reasons. This guy could kill someone, seriously.

Again, thanks for all the input.

n198ua
You work in news...

It's a perfect sweeps story...

and I'm not kidding either


LV (who has worked in news longer then I care to admit)
LV702 is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 1:21 pm
  #32  
10 Countries Visited20 Countries Visited30 Countries Visited15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bansko, Bulgaria
Programs: Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 1,260
Originally Posted by cpx
Ignoring a request/notice/information provided by OP and doing something
that could potentially be fatal shouldn't be taken lightly. Whether the OP
had the ID or not, his request not to use a metal detector should not have
been ignored.
Believe me I agree with you! (see my earlier post) But there are so many people who feel that if you do as you are told you have nothing to worry about.... the media seems to lean that way most days (think FOX).
bzbdewd is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 1:26 pm
  #33  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,957
You should also request that the tape of the incident from the security cameras be saved so as to prove up your contention. You need to do that sooner rather than later. Otherwise it is very easy for the TSA to deny that the incident happened.
ND Sol is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 2:08 pm
  #34  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SFO
Posts: 259
deleted

Last edited by mikeon; Feb 4, 2011 at 6:22 pm
mikeon is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 3:08 pm
  #35  
Original Poster
20 Countries Visited
500k
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: DSM, BKK or anywhere with an airport
Programs: UA 2P, HH Gold
Posts: 1,125
Originally Posted by mikeon
I don't think I quite understand the entire story here. So tell me if this is correct.
Did at some time did you go through a side door into the secondary screening area and get a pat down or did they just let you walk away?
Walked away.
n198ua is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 3:24 pm
  #36  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
What the TSO did was, technically, an assault -- you were placed in fear of an imminent, unpermitted offensive contact. Should you sue? No -- aside from a few moments of fear, you have no damages.

However, next time something like that happens, call for a LEO immediately. The moron TSO could have sent you to the hospital or even killed you. Assault is assault and, once told that you had a pacemaker, he had absolutely no business approaching you with the wand -- waving that wand at you was no different than waving a knife or pointing a loaded gun. If it was me, I'd have pressed charges. At minimum, that idiot should be fired. I think he should have been arrested.
PTravel is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 4:02 pm
  #37  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Programs: DL Platinum, Marriott Platinum, Hilton Silver, Hertz 5 Star Gold
Posts: 287
Had this happened in CVG or LEX, I would have pressed charges accordingly:

KRS 508.060 Wanton endangerment in the first degree.
(1) A person is guilty of wanton endangerment in the first degree when, under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, he wantonly engages in conduct which creates a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another person.

(2) Wanton endangerment in the first degree is a Class D felony.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 70, effective January 1, 1975.

What would likely happen is that they would drop it to Wanton endangerment in the second degree, which is a Class A misdemeanor. But I bet you could make this one stick.
LEX-LGA Commuter is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 4:32 pm
  #38  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Programs: AAdvantage, SkyMiles, USAir, Singapore, BA
Posts: 602
Go for it. Find out what statutes cover both these cretins' actions, and see if you can sock it to them. Felony would be great, but a misdemeanor with enough press coverage would be almost as good.

Can you imagine the chastising effect such a case would have on the entire TSA clown show? I'm really tired of the public being pushed around the way reports on this forum prove.

Get those tapes subpoenaed and under evidentiary rules NOW!
CessnaJock is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 7:35 pm
  #39  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,386
Originally Posted by LV702
You work in news...

It's a perfect sweeps story...

and I'm not kidding either


LV (who has worked in news longer then I care to admit)
Nail head. Hammer. Hit.

I agree completely.
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 8:36 pm
  #40  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by PTravel
What the TSO did was, technically, an assault -- you were placed in fear of an imminent, unpermitted offensive contact. Should you sue? No -- aside from a few moments of fear, you have no damages.

However, next time something like that happens, call for a LEO immediately. The moron TSO could have sent you to the hospital or even killed you. Assault is assault and, once told that you had a pacemaker, he had absolutely no business approaching you with the wand -- waving that wand at you was no different than waving a knife or pointing a loaded gun. If it was me, I'd have pressed charges. At minimum, that idiot should be fired. I think he should have been arrested.
While I agree with your sentiment, I don't think it's assault due to the lack of mens rea.
law dawg is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 9:31 pm
  #41  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 966
Originally Posted by law dawg
While I agree with your sentiment, I don't think it's assault due to the lack of mens rea.
So what is the legal term for a wrongful interaction that has a substantial possibility of serious harm or lethality to an innocent person? I mean, are we talking criminal negligence, wanton endangerment, what? The TSO could have *KILLED* the OP, due to his own ignorance of what he was REQUIRED to do.

I've heard it said, repeatedly, that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." This should, in a country like ours, apply to agents of the State AT LEAST as much as to us lowly little peons.
erictank is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 9:34 pm
  #42  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Programs: AAdvantage, SkyMiles, USAir, Singapore, BA
Posts: 602
Originally Posted by erictank
This should, in a country like ours, apply to agents of the State AT LEAST as much as to us lowly little peons.
Two words: Alberto Gonzales
CessnaJock is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 9:38 pm
  #43  
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA
Programs: AAdvantage, MileagePlus, SkyMiles
Posts: 4,338
How awful. Don't let that stupid guy bully you- tell the airline, TSA, and your Congressperson. Did you take his name? I hope you did.

This kind of behavior is AWFUL. So sorry you had to go through this...

Andrew
MrAndy1369 is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 9:44 pm
  #44  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 253
Originally Posted by erictank
So what is the legal term for a wrongful interaction that has a substantial possibility of serious harm or lethality to an innocent person? I mean, are we talking criminal negligence, wanton endangerment, what? The TSO could have *KILLED* the OP, due to his own ignorance of what he was REQUIRED to do.

I've heard it said, repeatedly, that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." This should, in a country like ours, apply to agents of the State AT LEAST as much as to us lowly little peons.
Mens rea , if you did not know, means "guilty mind". The TSO probably did not know that his actions could cause the OP harm. He was doing his job as required by SOP and policy.
mmartin4600 is offline  
Old Oct 23, 2007 | 9:45 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 253
Originally Posted by CessnaJock
Two words: Alberto Gonzales
What's your point?
mmartin4600 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

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.