Skip to comments.$11,000 fine, arrest possible for some who refuse airport scans and pat downs
Posted on 11/20/2010 7:31:28 AM PST by chickadee
click here to read article
If well trained folks are checking out passengers I wouldn’t be as concerned. But no way could there possibly be that many micro expression experts willing to man security checkpoints. I’ve considered just wearing a t-shirt that says “Just anxiety... I am not going to blow you up or steal your stuff. Leave me alone.”
I have not flown for almost 10 years, and I can't imagine that I will ever fly again. They force us to submit to demoralization or to reduce our lifestyles. This is what the government does to people.
Other countries, including Australia, currently do not subject passengers to this type of aggressive process
As to Michael Chertoff’s antics - is that “guilt by association”..?
My key point still stands - i.e. the current level of outrage over “implementing” these nude scanners and enhanced “groping” of private parts would be 10 times greater - with the lamestream media leading the charge, if it were Bush (or any Republican) occupying the White House
Pistole’s action as an employee of the FBI is not germane to his responsibilities in the TSA., except insofar as now the entire population of the US are his ‘bad guys.`
He is now in a Policy and Public relations position and obviously he has failed disastrously in those endeavours.
I am sure he is good to his children and would help old ladies across the road - but that should be immaterial to a Senate Oversight hearing at the very moment went the county is in an uproar of terrifying 3 year olds, groping children and assaulting women.
Even if Sen. McCaskill refers to them as ‘love taps’ and is ‘wildly excited· at prospect of being electronically stripped. Of course after showing her Senate ID card to avoid such a situation.
Exactly what this Arizonian had in mind when I wrote it.
On your post 56: great point about the children. And the backscatter scan is unsafe, it exposes you to a dose of radiation, that could be very dangerous for people that are prone to cancer, have had cancer, the young and the elderly.
I need to get to Boston next month and had considered flying, but we really do live within (long) driving distance and will do that instead. This settled the matter for me.
Mr. mm and I were thinking of a trip to FL to visit his mother and I don’t know if he’d go for driving or not. That’s a long trip on the road.
**I will ask my contact for clarification but my understanding is that it means once you are actually in the process of being screened.**
So, once they start molesting your young child, you cannot tell them to stop and leave the area. This is crazy and these people are thugs.
Everyone needs to be stopped and frisked on the sidewalk, and in public parks, and everywhere else... until it is determined that they don’t pose a threat. After all, the operating paradigm is apparently the presumption of guilt until innocence is proven. This includes molesting children - for the children, of course.
DeMint’s appearance is here at about 1:18 in the video. He was nicer than I’d have been, and it was disappointing. I wouldn’t go so far as to call it kissing. Maybe flirting.
Hardly anyone in Congress seems to be concerned about liberty anymore.
Can someone please show me where I can find this in the US Code? Or are they simply making this one up as they go?
What kind of questions do you suppose will be asked of those who decide they don’t want to be groped?
I’d sure as heck rather answer questions about the purpose of my trip than have somebody feeling around on my body - knowing darn good and well that somebody really serious about getting a bomb on board would have it placed inside their body where none of the screening procedures would be effective at all EXCEPT the questions to screen for behaviors.
IOW, I would much rather have an effective, rigorous but non-invasive questioning than be groped only to be blown to bits mid-air anyway because the groping wasn’t effective at keeping me safe.
Were they disappointed when they saw what it really was?
Outstanding post. First one I’ve seen that speaks up against what some are condoning as the “new” perfect model for us. I do not wish to be interrogated to travel in what used to be a free country.
Just driving from AZ to TX, through a small part of NM, in May, on vacation, we were stopped at endless roadblocks. From the highway to smaller roads, we were interrogated about our vacation plans. Sniffed by dogs. All in the primary BP line.
And we have our F-150 with a camper shell — clearly visible (not tinted windows or anything), empty except for a couple of suitcases and a cooler. We are clean and clean-cut, if I do say so myself.
It disgusted me that we couldn’t even enjoy the sights without harassment. And yes, the Hispanic BP loved interrogating the stupid white people, while the one non-Hispanic BP we encountered let us go after we answered the citizenship question.
Yeah, that would be a real boon to the economy.
No matter how this fiasco ends the end result will in no way be good for the airlines, and the more time that passes the more and more I'm thinking that is the whole idea.
If you wanted to crash the economy quickly, this is a pretty good way to go about it.
Companies across the country prohibit this type of inappropriate touching.
If a company requires one to have their junk rubbed, is this a “hostile work environment”?
Well, I suppose their logic is this:
“If you were a terrorist and had a bomb... they are going to search you... you stop and leave and come back another day.”
The airlines are going to lose a lot of customers over the TSA’s bad behavior.
My brother brought up the fact that El Al flights are somewhere in the neighborhood of 60K a year. If that's the case, then extensive background checks may simply not be "scalable" in a model where there's up to 5,000 commercial flights in the air at any given moment.
I want to see Big Sis on a talk show undergo a love pat demonstration on TV ambush style. Let’s see if she submits.
That's the part that trips me out. I can distinctly remember having conversations prior to the 2008 election with co-workers who ended up voting for Obama. They really 'felt' that listening in on cell phone conversations in Pakistan of terrorists who have never set foot on American soil somehow violated their Constitutional rights against unreasonable search. Yet they are now silent when it comes to these airport searches. They are constantly re-arranging the new reality in their minds in order to justify their earlier feelings. I have begged them to never vote again in a national election since our founding fathers never intended for anyone so non-rational to vote in the first place.
I do not know how many flights El Al has each year. 60K could be right on the money. I do know that Ben Gurion Airport handles roughly 10M passengers annually. By comparison, almost 700M flew in the US in 2008. You're dead on, we are talking about an enormous difference in scale.
To do what the Israelis do (if you really wanted to do that), you would see a TSA that would have to probably triple (or more) in size. This of course is something else that is ignored.
That’s what I will do, I didn’t fly much anyway, but I won’t at all now. Let the airlines go broke, then the TSA can pat each other down....
#1: At no time do you have to answer any questions from any law enforcement agent or agency. It is not just after you have been advised of your Miranda rights, it is any time whatsoever.
#2: The TSA has no legal right to take any steps to ensure you pose no threat to the GENERAL PUBLIC, as they now claim. The Transportation Security Administration can secure transportation, but once you announce that you refuse to be further searched and give up your right to fly, they have no mandate to proceed further.
They would argue that you have entered a secure area, and like the police officer who can arrest someone for drunk driving before they actually start or move the car, they can continue the investigation. However, considering the number of false positives (the number of people who set off the alarm but are not found to have any weapons or explosives) is somewhere around 99.999%, they would be hard-pressed to argue that just the metal detecting arch alarm was probable cause to believe you were a danger to the public.
If I set off the metal detection alarm, I personally have no problem with the full body scanner. If someone wants to get off looking at my Johnson, so be it. Mrs MindBender is very opposed however to either the Playboy of the Sky photos or the grope search now conducted.
If we are stopped and they want search her, we will gladly provide any identification they want to see. We will request that a local LEO be there as a witness at all times. I will politely announce i am invoking my Miranda rights re any intrusive questioning, but I would answer any reasonable questions (what flight, pack own bags, etc.) However, once I refuse to answer any question under Miranda, i will answer nothing more.
After they have had time to look at our IDs, (say 5-10 min) check us out, I will ask if they still demand a full body scan or physical search of my wife. If they answer yes, I will announce our intent to not fly and ask if we are under arrest.
They will probably answer, no, but we could be.
I will say, fine, do so if you must, but you do so without our permission. You know who we are if you want to seek criminal charges later, but we are leaving. I would then politely and quietly walk out.
I would them immediately file suit. They have unreasonably denied me my rights to engage in interstate commerce, use of a federally regulated entity, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Let them then be on the defensive. Watch how fast the lemmings run them.
THE ABOVE IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE OR COUNSEL IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER. PLEASE OBTAIN LEGAL ADVICE FROM YOUR LEGAL COUNSEL BEFORE TAKING ANY SUCH ACTION.
Actually, a number of us on FR did that as well. My tyrant radar goes off anytime government starts treading on Americans' liberty. And I campaigned for Mr. Bush and supported the Bush Doctrine. But a lot of the domestic infringements were wrong.
“The ideas that lead to this: have never gone away. They re-surface and find their application when these monsters acquire control of the apparatus of the state. When that control becomes absolute, mass murder begins. There is only one way to stop it.”
“Podesta: Obama Can Use Armed Forces to Push Progressive Agenda (WTF?!?)”
Obama has declared war against the people of the United States.
The BIG difference is that the Israelis only interrogate those that meet their profile of a potential problem. They do not do it to everyone and in fact, they publicize the types they will interrogate.
I don’t specifically know how difficult it would be to train people to spot the responses, but I would guess it really wouldn’t be that difficult. It certainly would, however, require a higher standard for TSA personnel, and this is likely the biggest reason why it will never be done.
“Does the federal government have the right to ask you who you’re visiting and why when you’re traveling from NYC to Indianapolis? No need to answer, I already know that you do because you have vigorously endorsed the “Israeli Method”.
Amen. After seriously considering profiling, scanning, groping, and now this rampant “Israeli Method” crap, I have come to the conclusion that the only constitutional method of protecting our airlines is allowing passengers to unionize. Then the administration would give all the union bosses free flights, take over or bail out the airlines, and drop fares to next to nothing (for union members, of course).
Seriously, the only way to get things back to reality from this ridiculous ‘it’ll-all-be-safe-if-only-we-give-everyone-anal-probes-and-ask-about-their-sex-lives’ attitude is to post a big “ENTER AT OWN RISK” sign on the door to everyone’s homes so that when they leave in the morning they realize life ain’t fair, easy, or safe. At what point do we realize that after the government makes airports Gestapo zones, it’ll be doing so anywhere there are buses, boats and cars? Not trains, of course, because that nice government fellow would like us to get used to those, so we’re docile on the way to the reeducation camps.
When you count the hours people waste in various lines for permissions from government to live that life in the guise of ‘protection,’ it all adds up to the notion of freedom being shredded already.
Railroads and local transit will be next for this kind of security. Since 9/11, trains have been the main targets of Muslim terrorists in the West.
Fine...only as long as every...EVERY person is subjected to the same assaults.
This includes all muslims wearing head gear/clothing. No religion exceptions. No exceptions, period.
Like all other 0bama crap they make rules for all or most then give ‘wavers’ to their friends/donors.
It disgusted me that we couldnt even enjoy the sights without harassmen
reminds me of our trip to DC. Oppressive, rude security, bag checks, metal detectors, lines for everything. My husband was holding a place in line for me (stated on ticket it was permissable to hold places in line. I walked down the sidewalk, joined him in line and we started talking to some people around us. Suddenly everyone starts looking behind me and says ‘watch out’. My husband jumps in front of me to protect me from the gorilla of a security guard charging at me with hand on her holster! My crime? She ‘thought it looked like I was skipping in line!’
why would you charge/tackle someone for that? I wouldn’t even think they would care unless other people complained to her that I skipped! Goons on a power trip!
Osama is no doubt enjoying this spectacle. Even if his people never kill another American, he has succeeded in bringing a lot of misery into our lives. And it just seems to keep getting worse.
I hate the thought that we are responding exactly as he hoped.
*** I want to see Big Sis on a talk show undergo a love pat demonstration on TV ambush style. Lets see if she submits. ***
Yes!! Get her on one of the talk shows. Have her submit to the full body scan, but don’t show the scan to the live audience, only to the ‘remote viewers’ at home. Then have her submit to the body search. That’s how it used to be done. The leaders demonstrate how new procedures are nothing to fear.
Bingo. The biggest problem Obama's government has with the Israeli model is that it involves profiling.
Most of us feel pretty much the same way.
Don’t forget to refer to it as “Obama’s TSA”.
“Your money or your dignity”
I wouldn't condone that, either. Imagine having a TSA screeners little kid be there to watch him get beaten to a pulp. That would leave a mental scar that would never go away and might have even worse repercussions on everybody later in that kid's life. They going to beat up the female screeners, too? If you get THAT mad, just sue. That would be more acceptable, IMHO.
“The TSA should be defunded by our new Congress and replaced with the Israeli model for airport security.”
Have you ever flown into or out of Ben Gurion on El AL? Do you have any idea how intrusive those interrogations are?
Where are you going, who are you visiting, why are you visiting them, do you like Israel, why are you angry etc, Are you Muslim, are your parents Muslim, etc, etc.
How is an interrogation - with no right to refuse to answer - any less a violation of an aggressive pat-down (that are also done to people using the “Israeli method”)?
Does the federal government have the right to ask you who you’re visiting and why when you’re traveling from NYC to Indianapolis? No need to answer, I already know that you do because you have vigorously endorsed the “Israeli Method”.
Agree that both are intrusive, but I’ll take the questioning any day. If the real goal is to stop terrorists, good examiners can detect shady characters who lie pretty easily, and the more the person is exposed, the deeper the questioning gets - and the claims a traveler makes can ultimately be verified if need be in most cases.
However, with the scan and grope, it is immediate and total exposure based on absolutely nothing. It is a violation of basic human dignity at its fullest, and it will not stop at airports, IMO.
My experience has been that they interrogate everyone, just some more than others.
I'm half-Sicilian. My skin is pretty olive colored, more so in the Winter, oddly. I have an Italian given name, and an Anglo last name. The last time I flew to Israel (2008), I was questioned pretty extensively, even though I was active-duty Navy at the time. But, they questioned the blond-haired woman in front of me, even more. To be fair, I have no idea what kind of passport she was traveling on, or any other of her particulars, but she definitely got the third degree.
That’s so horrible!!!! I’m glad I got to see DC for the last time, pre-911 (their excuse for this new tyrannical govt).
They are training us to comply with any thug in uniform, mostly flunkos who couldn’t even get jobs anywhere else.
They are preparing us to line up for the concentration camps.
I tried not to let it ruin our trip — my husband and I were switching off driving through the national and state parks of Texas, but I felt like we were completely in a police state. Every time I was driving and came upon one of the govt checkpoints (they can put them within 100 miles of the border), I could feel my face turning red....
So much for the bots saying “just don’t fly.”
“My key point still stands - i.e. the current level of outrage over implementing these nude scanners and enhanced groping of private parts would be 10 times greater - with the lamestream media leading the charge, if it were Bush (or any Republican) occupying the White House.”
Exactly right. Just like the Republicans didn’t get upset when Bush announced that as President he had the authority to lock up anyone indefinitely with no rights to a lawyer or to even know the charges against him. What Republican would have gone along with that if it had been Obama who had first claimed that power?
I am going to bump my own post.
And that is what used to be called treason.
The Obama Administration is using this to try to get the general public used to surrendering all their rights in exchange for any kind of travel eventually.
If it isn’t stopped here, the system will devour our Constitutionally protected freedoms and liberties.
Here is some common sense to throw into the argument.
“...But how afraid should Americans be of terrorist attacks? Not very, as some quick comparisons with other risks that we regularly run in our daily lives indicate. Your odds of dying of a specific cause in any year are calculated by dividing that year’s population by the number of deaths by that cause in that year. Your lifetime odds of dying of a particular cause are calculated by dividing the one-year odds by the life expectancy of a person born in that year. For example, in 2003 about 45,000 Americans died in motor accidents out of population of 291,000,000. So, according to the National Safety Council this means your one-year odds of dying in a car accident is about one out of 6500. Therefore your lifetime probability (6500 ÷ 78 years life expectancy) of dying in a motor accident are about one in 83.
What about your chances of dying in an airplane crash? A one-year risk of one in 400,000 and one in 5,000 lifetime risk. What about walking across the street? A one-year risk of one in 48,500 and a lifetime risk of one in 625. Drowning? A one-year risk of one in 88,000 and a one in 1100 lifetime risk. In a fire? About the same risk as drowning. Murder? A one-year risk of one in 16,500 and a lifetime risk of one in 210. What about falling? Essentially the same as being murdered. And the proverbial being struck by lightning? A one-year risk of one in 6.2 million and a lifetime risk of one in 80,000. And what is the risk that you will die of a catastrophic asteroid strike? In 1994, astronomers calculated that the chance was one in 20,000. However, as they’ve gathered more data on the orbits of near earth objects, the lifetime risk has been reduced to one in 200,000 or more.
So how do these common risks compare to your risk of dying in a terrorist attack? To try to calculate those odds realistically, Michael Rothschild, a former business professor at the University of Wisconsin, worked out a couple of plausible scenarios. For example, he figured that if terrorists were to destroy entirely one of America’s 40,000 shopping malls per week, your chances of being there at the wrong time would be about one in one million or more. Rothschild also estimated that if terrorists hijacked and crashed one of America’s 18,000 commercial flights per week that your chance of being on the crashed plane would be one in 135,000.
Even if terrorists were able to pull off one attack per year on the scale of the 9/11 atrocity, that would mean your one-year risk would be one in 100,000 and your lifetime risk would be about one in 1300. (300,000,000 ÷ 3,000 = 100,000 ÷ 78 years = 1282) In other words, your risk of dying in a plausible terrorist attack is much lower than your risk of dying in a car accident, by walking across the street, by drowning, in a fire, by falling, or by being murdered.
So do these numbers comfort you? If not, that’s a problem. Already, security measurespervasive ID checkpoints, metal detectors, and phalanxes of security guardsincreasingly clot the pathways of our public lives. It’s easy to overreact when an atrocity takes placeto heed those who promise safety if only we will give the authorities the “tools” they want by surrendering to them some of our liberty...”
“Don’t Be Terrorized”
(You’re more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder)