It obviously depends on what you were being told to do, but there is a difference in asking for a supervisor and acting like an adult, then arguing, raising your voice, and getting aggressive. This is the difference between people like you and people who get arrested.

Do you condone TSA and LEO that act in an agressive manner? Many TSA agents I've seen like to stand and yell orders to the entire crowd of people waiting to go through the line. Not only are they yelling, but using an agressive tone.

Where's the "due process" in cops tasering people to death? Or throwing this woman to the ground for no apparent reason?

Just another reason that this country is in the mess that it's in; you should be calling for heads.

We have agreed in this thread that we do not know all the facts, that being said, I have to reserve judgment. I can't say that I am comfortable in what I saw, but I'll let play out. Having been in LE for almost 15 years, I've seen both sides. There are people who spend their lives trying to instigate things and cops who love to entertain them. This never bodes well for either party.

Holding LE to a higher standard is perfectly acceptable, but giving the public to no standard is not. We are all a part of this society and every member needs to play a part. Even if it's simply not being a jerk to everyone around them. Allegedly, we have a Government of the people and by the people. So why is the standard of conduct a polar opposite?

Kindness is not a sign of weakness.

TSA shouldn't be trying to take pax out of visual contact with their belongings during a search. The LEO certainly shouldn't be telling someone to not watch their property during screening unless the LEO is going to take personal responsibility for the person's property while the owner can't watch (which I doubt any LEO would do).

Interesting that your assessment and mine from a previous post essentially lead to the same thing--the LEO tried to distract the pax from visually watching her property, the pax declined to do so, and the LEOs used that as a motivation to dominate and control the pax. IMO a typical response--LEO for a second thinks he/she doesn't have total control of a situation and so takes down and arrests a civilian to regain that control.


TSA has no grounds to keep a pax from watching the search of their belongings. It is well established here and elsewhere that TSA is crawling with thieves and wannabe thieves.

A LEO called over because a pax demanded to watch the search of her belongings has no probable cause to initiate his/her own search of a passenger. Any such search is a case of joint power-tripping and abuse by the TSOs and the LEOs and should be harshly dealt with by escalating punishment leading to termination.

So pax should put up with TSOs stealing their belongings, separating them from their purse and/or wallet, grabbing their pregnant wife's breasts, claiming a leather bookmark is a deadly weapon, forcing them to remove their prosthetic limbs, claiming the pax has no free-speech rights at the airport, etc.? Every one of these is a confirmed incident that has been reported here on FT or elsewhere. But they shouldn't make a ruckus because power-tripping TSOs and LEOs will trump up some charges and intimidate them through arrest?

Absolutely disgusting.



I'm not worried about the traveling public. I'm worried about the TSA following their own bleepin SOP, allowing passengers to monitor and protect their property since TSA refuses to do so, and treating passengers with the respect and dignity they both deserve and are guaranteed under the Constitution.

When a cop CHOOSES TO VIOLATE the public trust by assaulting a woman for no apparent reason, it's in my eyes a betrayal of the oath HE CHOSE to take when HE CHOSE to become a police officer. Not only is this a betrayal to the oath he CHOSE to take when he CHOSE to become a cop, it's a betrayal of the public trust, which by taking his job offer, he CHOSE to be burdened with.

People like that pig are NOT human and don't deserve to be treated as such. I'm sure if you had a daughter who was assaulted by a cop for no apparent reason you'd be livid too. Thus they've proven themselves undeserving of any sympathy, kindness, or compassion whatsoever.

Apparently the idiots in Washington are too thickheaded to realize that when the people of this country are kind to them it doesn't mean they're giving them license to walk all over them.

So you're not concerned with the totality of the situation, just the facts that support your pre-determined view?

Perhaps this thread should be merged with the original discussion?

Over there, I said:

IMHO, upstream of the video, the pax did something to initiate the conflict, but that is just MHO.

Unless the words she used were "You guys are pi$$ing me off. I'm getting my gun out". Or "You keep poking around like that and I'm setting off the bomb". Likely this didn't happen, but until the audio is available, or witness accounts of her words are released, it is curious why the cop acted like he did.

If that is the case the LEO should be fired or put on disability leave, as his terrible reaction time clearly disqualifies him for a job that requires quick reactions (drawing a sidearm, for example).

You would have preferred that he shot her before they got to the screening area?

Perhaps he was put on leave. There are just too many things we don't know.

My point was that if the passenger action that caused the LEO's reaction came before the video starts, the LEO clearly took too long to act. Therefore most theoretical situations that have the passenger taking any action before the beginning of the video that justify the physical confrontation also require that the officer be so slow to respond that he should not be a police officer.

If someone is a threat in such a way that requires a reaction involving the physical force seen in the video, how long should it take for an officer to initiate such a reaction?

As long as it requires in their judgment. That is why we have review boards. Police in this country (generally) are not allowed to operate in a vacuum. That is often expensive for the jurisdictions involved.

We don't have enough information to know what actually went down in this case.

If you watch the video, she had stuff in her hand and was touching her bag during the screening process. Not just "in visual contact". Big difference if she is trying to touch and grab stuff while they are searching the bag and they told her to stop.

This post is so scary, I may soil myself.

Did you not watch the video? Did you not see where it started with the woman standing next to the TSO doing his thing. Next, the officer shows up and pulls her to the ground. No conversation, no negotiation, no warning - just a violent attack five seconds after showing up.

You know very well the way american police, military, etc work is to make very broad statements when they are wrong about a situation. However, any time there are real facts to support their actions then all of a sudden, very vivid details come out. WHen it comes to american police/military, No details means they are lying

Allow me to summarize what you are saying via this rudimentary FLow CHart:

Pax argues ---> Ask Pax to step back ---> Pax refuses ---> Attack pax

Again, no concept of using negotiation to diffuse anger; no concept of reasonable force, no concept of decency.

Irrelevant to this case

I support the 1% who will fight fire with fire.