Female senator tweets about 'very uncomfortable' screening by TSA

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by RB, Mar 11, 2013.

  1. RB

    RB Founding Member

    jtodd likes this.
  2. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    They're just love pats, Claire, just love pats. >3

    One grope at at time, we will win this, yup, yup, yup, yup!
     
  3. jtodd

    jtodd Original Member

    Keep'em coming for her and the rest of the AFS'rs. When they get theirs, and they all will eventually, their colors seem to change rather quickly.
     
  4. CelticWhisper

    CelticWhisper Founding Member

    I've actually been rather impressed with McCaskill of late. She's come around on TSA and is also apparently serious about forcing the FAA to amend regulations regarding PEDs on takeoff and landing. That rule has irked me for a long time as I suffer severe pain from pressure changes and would prefer to have music available to zone out during landings. As it is I have to take a bit more aspirin than is probably healthy, and some maximum-strength Sudafed, an hour before landing and hope for the best.
     
  5. RB

    RB Founding Member

    If you don't know how learn to do an effective valsalva manuver. Take a bottle of nasal saline spray. Between the two you may ease the pain a touch.
     
  6. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Wonder if she was flying out of STL? TSA @ STL is a cesspool. That was where my wife was groped 2 years, 4 months, 10 days ago. We quit flying after that experience. When I found her (WN doesn't let companions go through their priority line, so she had to go through the normal lanes), she was sitting down, semi-shocked, just inside security. I eventually learned that the bitch screener had run her hands up under my wife's bra -- and this was in a public screening.
     
  7. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    a 100% false results test used to feel over, front of the hands, several times, and her labia, of a sitting US senator??

    unreal and sick. I hope John Pistole and the screeners who carry this out suffer the gravest consequences. [edit add] commensurate with their acts. A couple of years in prison, at the least.
     
  8. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    Anecdotal information from various reports indicates that one can refuse the private part of the secondary search by insisting that they perform the search at the checkpoint. They can threaten to throw you out but you are complying with the search, just not going to a separate area to do it.

    From the reports I've read, the screeners relent and do a minimal search at the checkpoint and let the pax go. They would have to "take you into custody" to force you into another room and lack the arrest powers to do so. Currently, they seem to rely on the pax ignorance of the rules and TSA's powers of coercion to get people to comply "voluntarily".

    Personally I would have refused an insisted it be done there and let them throw me out. If the local police force did throw me out I'd then have a decent case against the airport PD, who can be sued a lot more easily than TSA.
     
  9. RB

    RB Founding Member

    My understanding is that an Administrative search must be a public search. So is a TSA Resolution search an administrative search when performed behind closed doors out of public view or is it something else entirely?

    I don't have the legal legs to answer that question.
     
  10. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    Me neither but I'd take my chances anyway.
     
  11. TSA News Blog

    TSA News Blog News Feed

    ClaireMcCaskill.jpg
    U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill has finally gotten a taste of the medicine she and her fellow Congresspeople have shoved down the throats of the rest of us.​
    “‪Today in my airport screening, test on my hands was positive,” McCaskill wrote to her 89,100 followers. “Got private, more aggressive pat down. OMG. #veryuncomfortable‬.”​
    As we’ve written here before, only a few other Congressional reps or their family members have been abused by the TSA. Too few. That’s why nothing has changed and why nothing will change until it happens to more of them.​
    The hundreds of comments at The Hill article demonstrate that most people understand that concept.
     
  12. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    A private room is far from the "scrutiny of the traveling public."

    When the TSA finds a gun, the passenger is immediately turned over to the police. They should be required to do the same with a passenger who tests positive for explosives.

    I understand that there are differences between the physical presence of a gun and trace explosives. However in some jurisdictions guns are legal, just not in one's carry-on, and the passenger still gets turned over to the police. So why should the LEOs not also be brought in when there are indications that an explosive is present?

    Perhaps if the TSA were forced to call in LE in these cases, they would then get their act together and employ explosive detecting equipment that detects true explosives, rather than hand lotion.
     
  13. RB

    RB Founding Member

    My experience with TSA ETD testing (DFW again) would question your suggestion. My camera bag tested positive for some substance. Each and every item in my camera bag was further inspected, swabbed, xrayed and so forth. I went through the full monty pat down (in public) with TSA looking for who knows what. The problem wasn't me or my camera bag. It was TSA! A false positive from a TSA machine that is known to not be a reliable test. Had I been turned over to police I would likely have missed my flight. For a weapon I have no issue for immediate police involvement but until TSA procures reliable, accurate, functional screening equipment I say the burden is on TSA to fix its processes.
     
  14. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    On the other board, we have a lawyer certified to argue before the federal bench that states they cannot force you to submit to that search but that you have the right to refuse it and simply not fly that day. He's prepared to sue them if they attempt to force him. I find it hard to believe the TSA would desire to push a case like this.
     
  15. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    I totally agree that it is the TSA's problem to fix, but as with the backscatter, something drastic needs to be done in order to get the TSA to fix its problem.

    P.S. Once the ETD has indicated a positive, isn't that then "probable cause" to do a further, more invasive search of individuals? Does "probable cause" then override an administrative search?
     
  16. DeafBlonde

    DeafBlonde Original Member

    That is precisely what I would want to see argued in a court of law. If, indeed, the ETD machines are reliable, it would be up to the TSA to prove it. It would call into question this sexually-abusive practice of full-monty gropes and lay bare there reasoning behind the procedures. I bet what would be discovered is an illegal drug dragnet, at the most, and gross incompetence, at the least.
     
  17. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Backscatter is on the way out. I wish we had the truth on why but health concerns along with the degree of invasiveness were never properly addressed by TSA and I would suggest TSA did everything possible to hide the truth about these machines. They knew this information would come out in the Court ordered public comment period and had little choice but to reveal all or try another end run on the court which I think is the path they picked. If TSA says no comment period is needed because the machines have been removed we will know the truth of my statement.

    I don't think TSA has any authority to do more than an Administrative Search. They are not LEO's but I do think they can resolve alarms up to some point. If an implanted weapon was suspected I think resolution of that would exceed TSA's reach.

    When you have a sitting President that is not responsive to the public his agencies will follow suit. Nothing of import will change at TSA for the foreseeable future.
     
  18. RB

    RB Founding Member

    If TSA is the defendant what do they have to prove? The complainant would have to be able to prove their claims. Besides that TSA is fairly well insulated from the legal system. Not the way it should be.
     
  19. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Backscatter is on the way out precisely due to all the pressure put on the TSA to put up or shut up. They shut up. Same thing needs to be done with ETD.
     
  20. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I like the concept of ETD. The problem is selectivity of detected items. I'm not a chemist but do have some education in applied science and would be willing to bet that the detected components could be trimmed down to reduce false positives. For starters why do these machines used by TSA have the ability to detect drugs? Extra cost for a capibility not needed, unless TSA is lying which is quiet possible. If these machines alarm on very low levels of lanolins, peroxides, and other common items travelers use daily then they are not useful for the job intended.
     

Share This Page