When is a question a command?
 

I was in SFO last weekend, getting ready to make a short hop from SFO->SEA on Alaska. I was running late and got to security,dumped everything on the belt and proceeded to hurry through.I went to pick up my backpack and found one of the security drones had put their hand on it and asked me "Can I check your bag sir?"
I said no, it had been through the x-ray and that was enough and I was late for my flight and made a grab for it. She pulled it away from me and said "No sir!, I'm going to check your bag!"
I protested saying that she had asked me for my permission and I didn't give it and she replied "Oh, well that's how we tell you we're going to do it!"
I tried to argue with them as to how that wasn't what they had said and that they didn't state a demand but asked a question but that didn't go anywhere as there was a
definite language barrier there because the drone's superior came over and started speaking what sounded like rapid-fire spanish at this drone and took over from there.

This seems to me to be very deceptive and manipulating. I think I would mind less if they just plain came out and said they were going to do it and I didn't have any choice.

I'm not complaining about having to go through security or having things inspected.
I just want clarification as to when I'm required to do things and when I have a choice. If you're going to give me a choice, you have to be prepared for me to take choice you'd like.

Has anybody else run into this?---I'm curious...

JD

I have had one of my bags "checked" (they rub a little patch on the handle and put the cloth into an explosives "sniffer") on several occasions.

In my opinion?

Checking for exploding bags= good.

Arguing with security personnel= not good

It's not at all akin to a car stop, where a perhaps over-enthusiastic trooper wants to turn a broken taillight into a full cavity search.
In my opinion, there is NO "illegal search" bill of rights type issue at an airport. Just one man's opinion, and I understand the ambiguity you resent, but at an airport?? I think it's better if everyone just does as they're told. In my opinion.

[This message has been edited by JonNYC (edited 04-26-2001).]

SO the security person was being professional, "Can I check your bag sir?" - sounds like a nice way to ask a customer for what could be unpleasant - that is asking people to delay their travel for a security search.

In my opinion, you were out of line for not respecting the security person's request.

I don't care how late you are for your flight. Get there earlier.

cpd

I was flying out of Billings Montana last year with an apple box full of seashells wrapped in tissue paper. (Long story -- don't ask. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif )

I ran it through the x-ray machine and as it came out on the other side a security officer said, "There are some long, sharp objects in your box that we can't identify. We'll need to have a look inside."

That isn't a question, but he sort of paused to allow me to consent before he did it. Very professional, I thought.

I advised that they were all sea shells and asked him to take great care as he unwrapped them. He said that it would be best if I handled and unwrapped them and that he would only look. Again, very professional.

I like his approach best. He didn't ask to search my box (therefore avoiding implying that I could decline) but he didn't make me feel threatened either. Explaining why he was looking in the box probably helped lower the tension.

Anyway . . .

The gentleman/lady was just being polite and professional. It's sort of more like a friendly airline agent asking "May I please see you I.D./passport?"

You were among the small percentage with suspicious objects, even though nothing was wrong.

When security in MNL ask to open my luggage, they found that the suspicious object was just a coaster. All I said to my travelling companions was, "At least I know people are doing their job." http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

- Pat

I think I have to agree with Jet. If there is no choice involved for the passenger, there are polite ways to state this. As he was in a genuine(sp) hurry and the request was phrased as a question, he had every right to say no. Just my humble opinion

Just a guess ... but I suspect they don't "ask" to be polite, but for legal reasons so they can say you consented to the search should the matter go further.

I've had my bags checked many times at many different airports and they've always "asked" and I've always consented.

The law states you give consent to be searched when you arrive at the airport to fly on an airplane. If you refuse, you will not be allowed to proceed to the gate. Even your free speach rights are curbed. Just joking about bombs or guns can get you arrested.

good point, there may be legal reasons. Not being an expert on search and siezure laws, it is probably more defensible for the security guards to avoid illegal searches.

Listen, there's no question that if their "script" was written by an etiquette expert, it would be phrased like it once was to me in Tampa "sir, I have to check your bag, it will only take a minute, can you come over here with me?" That WOULD be preferable, 100%. However, these airport security personnel are, oft times, underpaid, underqualified, undereducated and underwhelmed with any pressing need you may have to make you flight. SOME of them are like this. Not all. If you run into one who can't manage to be polite, what are your options?

I just asked a friend of mine who was in Customs before he moved over to A.T.F. I asked him "when you worked at JFK, if a passenger was asked to allow a bag of his to be inspected to the full satisfaction of airport security folks, could he say 'no' to such a search?"
"sure" he said "and he would be told to turn around and immediately leave the airport. If the person in question was lucky, he ~wouldn't~ have Port Authority Police following him for further questioning"
So you don't HAVE to consent to the search...

I would never refuse a search of my bag. I think the original question was do you have the right to refuse. If you don't than making that clear from the start could avoid any unpleasantness.

iwant;
very true, he did ask if he had a right to refuse and did pose the logical question of: if I can't say no, why did you ask?
However, if you read his post again, you'll see that he also had a sort of mini tug-of-war with the agent over his bag. He "made a grab for it" whilst the agent "had her hand on it" as he described it.
I totally respect everyone's opinion on this, but, that is a very good way to get collared at an airport-- right or wrong.
Talk about a flight delay http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

[This message has been edited by JonNYC (edited 04-26-2001).]

That would cause a delay, wouldn't it. I agree that it does you no good to refuse the search.

Just to summarize, since different parts of the correct answer are contained in different posts:

The original question was posed correctly, since you do have the right to refuse. However, if you do so, the airline (acting through the security company, their agents) is required by the FAA to refuse to transport you. They do that by refusing you entry to the sanitized area of the airport. The original question still has to be asked because the right to inspect your bag is not unqualified. After over 20 years of routine airport security checks, people are supposed to understand this by now, and it's a little surprising that even some FF'ers apparently don't. This could all be explained in greater detail along with each request, but most people, IMO, would find this adding an unnecessary delay to the process.

Just to follow up a bit on what others have already stated:

The security check of one's person and carry-on bags at the airport is voluntary. If the security people ask if they can look in your bags, it truely is a question to which you can say "no." However, refusal of inspection will result in refusal to transport - that is, you don't have the option to refuse the inspection but continue on board your flight (the fact that the orignal poster was "in a hurry" of course has no bearing on the situation - after all, everybody in the airport "has a plane to catch").

One interesting thing is that in most airlines' tariffs, if the passenger refuses the voluntary security screening and is refused carriage for that reason, then they are entitled to a refund of the fare paid, *even if they have a non-refundable ticket*. I've never heard of someone that actually used this clause to get a refund, nor would I want to experience what would likely happen to someone that tried.