Thank you very much Bart. I shall copy and email your comments to my friends and family to make sure they know what to do next time they encounter this.

This should be handed to passengers as they go through checkpoints. Instead we have to find out about it from insiders like you on internet boards like this.

Thanks again for taking your time to post this.

I will make sure my family and friends have a copy of it as a reminder of the correct thing to do.

As an aside, even if a passenger were to complain about a comment, a lot of times the TSA bully will deny it altogether, or chalk it up to passenger misinterpretation. It's a lot easier to believe the TSA staff than some irritated passenger, so there needs to be a mechanism to record every bit of audio / video at the checkpoint, just like the dashboard cams on police cars.

Are all checkpoints adequately set up to record video and audio so that both TSA and passenger abuses are recorded? Note here I do admit that some passengers take it too far and abuse others as well as the TSA also, but that in the overall scheme of things, the TSA holds the upper hand and the real power to deny / detain abusive passengers, where as the passenger has no such powers.

Some airports are configured. Others are not. Depends on the airport budget. There's more I can say about this topic but am holding back intentionally.

Sometimes, we work harder and not smarter. With today's digital technology, there is absolutely no excuse for not having continuous CCTV and audio coverage for exactly the reasons you state and other reasons you didn't state.

Video recording is legal, audio recording is not

Thanks Bart. Greater visibility to passenger and TSA behavior can only be a good thing.

Really? From what basis do you draw that from?

Here's a police dash cam video that records both video and audio - is the police breaking the law?

Is this another example of you talking out of your behind and posting completely wrong advice again?

PS - I thought you were ignoring me?

Legal information regarding audio and video recording

This information is general and should not be considered as legal advice.

In general, most video only recordings are legal weather you inform the persons you are recording them or not.

Recording audio without the persons permission is almost always illegal,
that's why covert cameras don't have microphones.

How can you know for sure if it's ok to record video or audio in your situation?
Always check with an attorney before recording to make sure it is legal where you live.

Surreptitious recording laws are separated into different categories for video and audio recording.

Video Recording
Most video recordings are legal with or without consent.
There are very few laws which prohibit video recording of any kind, but there are laws in some areas dealing with areas of expected privacy. These include areas such as bathrooms, locker rooms, changing/dressing rooms, adult bedrooms, and other areas where a person should expect a high level of personal privacy.
The majority of the laws dealing with video recording privacy issues tend to allow surreptitious recording and monitoring of video activity under most circumstances without notification of any of the parties involved.

So far, the courts have allowed video recordings of nannies, elder care employees, and other types of video recordings made with covert cameras without the subjects consent.

Audio Recording
Most audio recordings without consent of one or all parties are illegal.
Recording audio is very different from video, there are definite federal and state laws prohibiting surreptitious recording and monitoring of audio conversations. These laws are taken very seriously by authorities and failure to abide by them could result in severe consequences.
There are two types of defined recording situations for audio recording. They are usually referred to as "One Party Consent" and "Two Party Consent".

"One Party Consent" means that only the person doing the recording has to give consent and does not have to notify the other party or parties that the conversation is being recorded.

"Two Party Consent" means the person recording the conversation must notify all of the other parties that the recording is taking place and they must consent to the recording.

Federal Law requires "One Party Consent" for audio recording.
Here is a list of state requirements regarding audio consent:

Here is a list of state requirements regarding audio consent:
Note: Laws change constantly, please check your states current laws before engaging in recording.


States with "One party Consent" for audio recording

Alabama - One Party
Alaska - One Party
Arizona - One Party
Arkansas - One Party
Colorado - One Party
District of Columbia - One Party
Georgia - One Party
Idaho - One Party
Indiana - One Party
Iowa - One Party
Kentucky - One Party
Louisiana - One Party
Maine - One Party
Minnesota - One Party
Mississippi - One Party
Missouri - One Party
Minnesota - One Party
Nebraska - One Party
New Jersey - One Party
New Mexico - One Party
New York - One Party
North Carolina - One Party
North Dakota - One Party
Oklahoma - One Party
Oregon - One Party
Ohio - One Party
Rhode Island - One Party
South Carolina - One Party
South Dakota - One Party
Tennessee - One Party
Texas - One Party
Vermont - One Party
Virginia - One Party
West Virginia - One Party
Wisconsin - One Party
Wyoming - One Party

States with "Two party Consent" for audio recording

California - Two Party
Connecticut - Two Party
Delaware - Two Party
Florida - Two Party
Hawaii - Two Party
Illinois - Two Party
Kansas - Two Party
Maryland - Two Party
Massachusetts - Two Party
Michigan - Two Party
Montana - Two Party
Nevada - Two Party
New Hampshire - Two Party
Pennsylvania - Two Party
Utah - Two Party
Washington - Two Party

I think there may be some exceptions on certain specific situations. It all has to do with reasonable expectation of privacy. I don't think a security checkpoint is such a place where a reasonable expectation exists. Could be something that varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Could be as simple as posting signs advising that audio recording is taking place.

Be that as it may, I agree that it would be more beneficial to playback audio-video to find out what really happened, who said what, etc.

Um the gibberish you cited only pertains to private, individual situations. This gives me good indication about how ill informed you are in general about many such matters.

This seems to be your modus operandi - ignore relevant facts and cite irrelevant fluff to avoid addressing the real issues. How about answering my question about the audio in the police dash cam?

A checkpoint is clearly different from any private encounter, and as such would have signs which would indicate "video and audio surveillance" is taking place.

People consent to being searched when they enter a checkpoint, and similar principle would apply to video / audio recordings.

Obviously there would have to be privacy considerations to these recordings, such as complete tracking and control to ensure none of it is used inappropriately or leaked, and if nothing unusual happens in 7 days, all recordings are deleted, etc etc...

It's no longer the 1970's, air travel is not glamorous.

I think a majority of FF'ers set your expectations far too high. You expect First Class treatment for LCC fare. A majority of you should step back and evaluate you actions and behaviors as to why you always seem to encounter problems.

Heres what I think:

So you're Mr. Gold Medallion Platinum, lower middle management type. You have your cool roll-aboard, with your neat-o (insert FF program) luggage tag. You expect separate lines, private lounges, priority over pretty much everyone else. That's fine, but it's the airlines fault. They cater to your every whim, grant every request, and this is what makes you happy.

What happens when you must leave this fantasy world and cross through a government run checkpoint?

All your FF Gold platinum status is gone. You are forced to stand in line and behave like all the other serfs.

And what does that do?

It makes you angry. Mad. Upset. You throw a tantrum. You can't yell at the TSA agent like you do to the poor person at the ticket counter, who gave you seat 2A instead of 1B.

Nope, why?

Because they don't tolerate your BS. If you're rude to them, they are rude back.

You want to get angry with them? You'll end up in the back of a cruiser.

So you come online and complain.

Just try stepping off your horse every time you go through screening. I'm guessing your problems will disappear.

Ha!!

Are you EngIceDave by any chance? You completely ignored my post about how it's not just the frequent fliers on this forum that are fed up, but mom and pop going to Disney, regular average joes who are fed up.

Did you ignore just a fraction of the non-FT links that were displayed?

Why are you ignoring the mass sentiment of resentment against TSA abuse?

Is it you EngIceDave?

"Ignore User" is such a useful tool. This is a public service announcement from your friend Spiff, who encourages healthy, not silly discussions.

UALOneKPlus wants to make TSO's into LEO's?


(and admin can check and see that rightseat is not me, I don't need to play that game)

http://grove.ufl.edu/~techlaw/vol9/issue2/guirguis.html

The same logic applies to the travelers who purchase the ultra-deep discounted ticket.

They think they deserve caviar for ground beef fare.

Everyone must go through TSA, the folks who travel less are not aware to the procedures. This frustrates them. I mean c'mon they paid $199 for that round trip to Orlando, they shouldn't have to listen or wait at TSA. They deserve their own line.

The Vacation traveler is far less of a PITA as a FF stuck up type.

BTW- I'm not Mr. EngIceDave.

Fair enough but since I'm not a man I'm going to have to ask that in return you accept your failure as a woman.

Hmm, what about that link is pertinent and relevant, may I ask?