Woman Arrested For Not Letting TSA Grope Her Daughter

from the terrorism? dept

A woman, who did not feel comfortable going through the TSA naked scanners, was arrested for disorderly conduct when she also refused to let the TSA molest and grope her daughter. I’m trying to figure out how this makes us any safer on airplanes.

“I still don’t want someone to see our bodies naked,” the mom is reported to have replied.

As for the pat-down option, the police report states that the mom didn’t want her daughter to be “touched inappropriately or have her “crotch grabbed.”

TSA agents say she became belligerent and verbally abusive. The woman was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct.

So, either your privacy gets violated, you get molested, or you get arrested. Where do we live again?

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Woman Arrested For Not Letting TSA Grope Her Daughter”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
183 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

You don’t have kids, do you?

And if you do, would you let strangers touch them and manhandle them in ways that (I hope) you taught them are inappropriate? What message are you passing to your kids?

One last thing: that mother was arrested for national security. Do you feel safer? Or would you feel even safer if the kid got touch in inappropriate ways?

Idiot. You and everyone else that supports this practice.

Chris Rhodes (profile) says:

Re:

“Once again, if denying women the vote is wrong, then why don’t they call the police? Oh wait, it’s valid and legal to stop women from voting.

Stop whining already.”

That’s a very good point you make.

“Once again, if making black people sit at the back of the bus is wrong, then why don’t they call the police? Oh wait, it’s valid and legal to make black people sit at the back of the bus.

Stop whining already.”

Can’t argue with that line of thinking at all.

“Once again, if rounding up Jews is wrong, then why don’t they call the police? Oh wait, it’s valid and legal to round up Jews.

Stop whining already.”

You’ve certainly backed me into a logical corner there. I don’t see any way to assail your iron-clad premise. Kudos to you, sir!

Anonymous Coward says:

Somebody has to have taken a straw poll by now on to the effectiveness of this. Obviously there have been no terrorist attacks, but how about counting the stupid screw ups that have happened before vs after the new screening. For instance, the number of people being in terminals illegally or with invalid credentials. Not that that even makes us any safer because by the time people are at the airport its a finger in the dike situation anyways. But at least it could help the tax dollars vs effectiveness arguments. I think most people could understand that if *people* can still get into the secure areas illegally then it wouldn’t be hard to get *things* into them either.

David Liu (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Then don’t let them get on a plane in the first place. There are so many more things that could go wrong than a terrorist on board. It is statistically more likely for a plane to crash due to pilot error or something going wrong on takeoff/landing than it is for it to even be blown up by a terrorist.

I can’t even recall the last time a terrorist actually blew up a plane (not attempt, but actually getting to go through with it) instead of hijacking it. And considering multiple multiple people have gotten through the TSA with guns or 4 foot long saw blades, or what have you, I simply don’t see the point in the TSA. Hell, as it is, the American public has had a higher success rate than the TSA at thwarting terrorist threats.

Joe Publius (profile) says:

Re:

That’s what bothers me most of all is the lack of perspective that can shine through in these situations.

Sure, in my life I’ve seen people become belligerent and verbally abusive because their latte wasn’t made to order. Some people just fly off the handle. Then again we’re talking about some gov’t agent saying it’s not only a responsibility, but a requirement to choose by random and extensively pat down some kid like they’re a coke mule. As has been pointed out here, it might be more unusual for a parent to NOT be belligerent.

Anonymous Coward says:

The party is over!

You stupid freetards, thinking that…oh..crap. I think I’m in the wrong article. Let me see what else I have in my little bag here…oh!

The law is the law! If you don’t like it you must be trying to sneak bombs onto planes in the no-no areas of children. More people die in terrorist related plane crashes every year than die by every other cause combined. Get your facts straight!

Paul Alan Levy (profile) says:

The fact is, we just don't know what happened

The Consumerist story just reports the TSA version that the woman “became belligerent and verbally abusive.” These are of course just conclusory characterizations; we don’t exactly know what she actually said and did, and we don’t know exactly what the TSA claim she actually said and did.

The underlying story from the Tennessean has this:

“[name omitted] yelled and swore at Transportation Security Administration agents Saturday afternoon at Nashville International Airport, saying she did not want her daughter to be ?touched inappropriately or have her ?crotch grabbed,? a police report states.

After the woman refused to calm down, airport police said, she was charged with disorderly conduct and taken to jail.

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110713/NEWS01/307130115/Police-charge-mother-Nashville-airport-altercation?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

The actual words reported do not include any swearing, and so not explain what she did from which she was supposed to “calm down.” “yelled” comes closest to being factual, but some people fell they are being yelled at whenever they are reprimanded. Again, very conclusory. So, in the circumstances, it is awfully hard to form a judgment about whether the arrest was justified.

And chances are, we will never find out, because chances are the charges will be dropped

Ccomp5950 (profile) says:

You play the lotto?

There are roughly 25,000 flights each day (I’m using NPR’s numbers) in the US.

25,000 x 365 = 9,125,000 flights a year

Since 2001 there have been 3 planes destroyed due to terrorist activities. and what a handful of failed attempts?

3 to 91,250,000 odds your flight will be blown up by a terrorist.

You are giving up your 4th amendment rights to odds that are worse then most state lotteries.

Andrew (profile) says:

I agree with the approach taken by the woman, protecting a kid from getting molested and scanned like that is fair. (Anyone remember the movie Airplane! with the scanner lol…)

What I don’t agree with is the verbal abuse stuff, which is probably why they arrested her in the first place.

It reminds me of the story with the flight attendant and the photo (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110705/20381614979/us-airways-employee-handles-complaining-passenger-tsa-way.shtml)

Alot of these type of protections while I understand that authorities think they are necessary are we really going to keep increasing them? I mean I honestly hate going through Airport Security to the point where I plan what I wear and what I carry on me so that I avoid as much hassel as possible. At the rate we going I expect airlines to give passengers sleeping pills or lock em in cages to make sure they don’t do anything bad…

panhead20 says:

And when the next would be bomber has a device in a body cavity will we have to submit to a body cavity search? I will not subject myself nor my family to needless radiation exposure nor TSA molestation. My family and I will not be flying until the TSA changes these procedures.

“They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays,” Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University school of medicine, told AFP.”No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner,”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/body-scanners-dangerous-scientists

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/20/aol-investigation-no-proof-tsa-scanners-are-safe/

The Incoherent One (profile) says:

Well

If this kind of thing continues then it would make sense for sex offenders and pedophiles to become TSA agents. Think about it. If they have yet to be convicted they can join the TSA and grope people with impunity. As long as they keep it at the “office” its not a crime. Those who protest will be arrested or cited, and the agent is then free to continue.

Now we here plenty of “protect the children” around here when it comes to new over reaching legislation. Here though is a real case where someone could actually be placing children in harms way, all in the name of protecting them in another way? It just doesn’t make any sense to me how this reactionary security and touching my three year old is supposed to protect me from the next terrorist-ic act.

While there may not a smoking gun which I could link to, the premise The argument makes sense. I may be cynical, but I think its more of a matter of WHEN an agent is finally caught rather than if he does.

Grae (profile) says:

From the original article:


[…]

Andrea Fornella Abbott yelled and swore at Transportation Security Administration agents Saturday afternoon at Nashville International Airport, saying she did not want her daughter to be ?touched inappropriately or have her ?crotch grabbed,? a police report states.

After the woman refused to calm down, airport police said, she was charged with disorderly conduct and taken to jail. She has been released on bond.

[…]

There’s some detail missing here: what was done to “calm down” Abbott? Did they attempt to kick her out of the airport before deciding arresting her? How long did it take before the TSA agents decided to pull out the handcuffs? The report says she was “belligerent”; was she being physically menacing (which is how I’d take it since they already mentioned she was yelling and swearing) or were they just tacking that on there to make the TSA look better?

Having more info might make this look less bad, though perhaps it could actually make them look a lot worse.

Anonymous Coward says:

So you’re quite the keyboard tough guy Masnick. When you flew to Berlin, did you confront TSA security over the outrageous intrusion or did you meekly submit. Don’t bother answering, it’s apparent.

It sucks that such extraordinary security is necessary. Personally, I drive any distance under 500 miles just to avoid the nightmarish experience that air travel has become. If some jerk-off needs to put his hand on my unit to assure that I’m not carrying C-4, so be it. I don’t like it but at least I’m not the guy whose job it is to pat down several hundred crotches a day.

John Doe says:

Re:

I went to Philadelphia, the birthplace of our nation, a few weeks ago for a mini-vacation. It would do this guy and all of our governmental leaders some good to go there and learn about why and how our country was founded. It is a real eye opener to see what the founding fathers risked to build this country and understand why they did it. Something we have forgotten in the last 200+ years.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“I don’t want them on a plane that blows up.”

Do you drive in the car with your daughter? Because that is statistically *much* more dangerous than flying has *ever* been; even before 9/11.

Bombs have blown up planes for many many years before 9/11 without this ‘security theater’ we have now. Why are we all of a sudden trying to prevent *anything* from happening *ever*?

The odds of a plane being blown up are ridiculously small. 9/11 was a hijacking, bombs aren’t hijackings. Period.

We’ve stopped another 9/11 through exactly 2 things;

1. Locked/reinforced cockpit doors

2. Flight #93, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber – You and I are going to beat the living snot out of *anyone* who tries to hijack or otherwise do something to harm the plane we’re riding in.

The rules *have* changed. People will no longer just sit calmly and expect to be released at the end.

JEDIDIAH says:

PA revolutionaries....

Actually someone does, or rather the US Government does.

That’s what they were created for.

I am owed being secure from treatment that feels like it came from an 18th century monarchy.

Someone else mentioned Philadelphia.

One of the PA delegates had some choice words very appropriate to this very situation.

AKP (profile) says:

Surprised...

I flew recently and was pleasantly surprised I did NOT receive any pat-down at all, despite refusing the backscatter scan.

I’m not sure what criteria they’re using to select people for “enhanced screening”, but it’s surely not everyone who refuses the naked scanning.

After I walked through the regular metal detector, and a TSA agent asked me why I refused the backscatter, I said I didn’t want to be irradiated.

He told me with a straight face that I’m exposed to more radiation during my flight than I would be from the scanner. I told him “You’re wrong,” and walked away. I wanted to tell him to Google “Logan Cancer Cluster,” but I decided not to argue with the guy…

I think TSA is starting to receive training to “manage objections,” much like retail salespeople are. A sign that these machines are not going away.

On topic… There’s always more to a story. It’s just *possible* that TSA had no intention of treating these two people poorly, the mother jumped to the conclusion they would and acted poorly herself.

TSA is security theater, not actually protecting us any better than we were before, and yes.. In many cases acting like fascists. That doesn’t give *us* the excuse to act badly ourselves.

Resist, but stay calm and carry on. ๐Ÿ™‚

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

I’m not talking about being annoying (and TSA agents are not cops).

If you want to complain or protest or dissent, I’m all for that. But disrupting the security procedures or being physically threatening is a legitimate reason to arrest someone, even if they have every reason to be upset.

I don’t know if what this woman did rises to that level, but, as a general rule, calm, rational protest is more effective than flying off the handle.

Robert Doyle (profile) says:

They are so close to falling down the slippery slope...

I don’t think anyone has tried this yet, but I imagine it is only a matter of time.

When is the US government going to give law enforcement (not customs & immigration) the power to act as customs and immigration officials? If they did that, police could then perform pat-downs (also known as ‘groping’) on anyone taking a) public transit b) personal transit c) walking down the damn street because you will soon need a license for sneakers (but not loafers – we all know terrorists never wear loafers…).

And anything found on those people (weapons, drugs, Canadian Currency) will be able to be used against them in prosecution.

Just taking the next ‘logical’ step.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Then you probably die along with everyone else in that situation. Do you really live your life in fear of what MIGHT happen? Do you really think a plane is going to be the next target/weapon for anyone wishing to do harm to America? We get groped and are no safer for it because of idiots like you who will give up everything so the crazy sand people don’t get us.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

@Benny

So you’d be okay with the police or some federal agency examining your car every time you drive somewhere to make sure there isn’t a bomb in the trunk?

Didn’t think so.

Are you really so stupid that you don’t understand the difference? Why not ask your helper to explain it so you don’t continue to make a fool of yourself.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Got news for you, they don’t do these checks all the time.

I flew to CA between Xmas and New Years. We went through the standard metal detectors but no groping or the new scanners.

It wasn’t that we weren’t picked, NOBODY was being checked at all. I watched for 5-10 minutes and quite a number of people (100+?) went through before deciding my watching might attract suspicion and headed for the gate.

This was at Dulles airport in DC AND at San Fran on the way back.

Checks like these are *only* effective if done *every* time. And that’s before you determine if the individual check has actual value (which it doesn’t in this case). If you’re only checking some of the time, people will just go at the times you aren’t checking and then the ‘security’ is moot.

Benny6Toes (profile) says:

Re:

There have been more attempts at car/truck bombings in the USA than plane hijackings, and a greater number of successful ones too. By your reasoning (if you can call it that) we should be inspecting every car on the road in some manner or another every time it leaves a person’s driveway.

If you can’t see a parallel, then perhaps you should take off the blindfold.

As for being a fool, well, I’m not the one willfully giving up my 4th Amendment protections. You go ahead and feel safer because of this if it makes you feel better.

someone (profile) says:

You play the lotto?

On average more Americans die from car/truck accidents each month than have died from all terrorist acts combined.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

I’m not afraid of terrorists, no one should be afraid of those losers.

But I do look both ways many times before crossing streets because I am fearful of my fellow Americans ability to operate their vehicles.

More people die each year crossing the street than have died from all terrorist attacks combined including 9/11.

ladyserenakitty (profile) says:

TSA is all about falsehoods. I had a round-trip between SAT and SLC (San Antonio International and Salt Lake City). In SAT I totally forgot to declare my medication, and was able to go on about my flight.

SLC was a totally different matter. I remembered to declare my medication (as the sign suggests), and there was a group of Mormon missionaries. First, the missionary in front of me got flagged for having an explosive, which turned out to be the gold-foil lettering on his bible. WTF. Second, I was asked some interesting questions about my medications, such as what I was taking them for and what dangers my meds posed to the plane. This made no sense to me.

This makes me think the TSA is more focused on harassing passengers than finding actual threats. I mean, they let Adam Savage through with a pair of very long razor blades.

someone (profile) says:

Re:

“So what are you going to do when the guy goes to the can, locks the door and blows the tail off of the airplane?”

What are you going to do when an asteroid knocks the tail of the airplane off?

What are you going to do when the terrorists set off a bomb at the security checkpoint on a busy day?

I can play what if games all day long too, but that does not really matter now does it?

There is never a good excuse to exchange liberty for security.

Especially when the security is doing nothing to stop the threats you fear.

Anonymous Coward says:

While I disagree with these TSA searches and scans, I think calling it molestation only derails the conversation and distracts people from the real issues. I think it’s best for us to refrain from such hyperbola when discussing these issues if we want our message to be taken seriously. I say this exactly because I disagree with these scans and I don’t want our message to be ignored thanks to this sort of irrelevant language.

Gabriel Tane (profile) says:

Re:

Quoted from the article:

“We took our shoes off and placed our laptops in bins. Schneier took from his bag a 12-ounce container labeled ?saline solution.?

?It?s allowed,? he said. Medical supplies, such as saline solution for contact-lens cleaning, don?t fall under the TSA?s three-ounce rule.

?What?s allowed?? I asked. ?Saline solution, or bottles labeled saline solution??

?Bottles labeled saline solution. They won?t check what?s in it, trust me.?

They did not check. As we gathered our belongings, Schneier held up the bottle and said to the nearest security officer, ?This is okay, right?? ?Yep,? the officer said. ?Just have to put it in the tray.?

?Maybe if you lit it on fire, he?d pay attention,? I said, risking arrest for making a joke at airport security. (Later, Schneier would carry two bottles labeled saline solution?24 ounces in total?through security. An officer asked him why he needed two bottles. ?Two eyes,? he said. He was allowed to keep the bottles.)” Little girls and old ladies, on the other hand… very much more dangerous than uninspected 12oz bottles labeled ‘saline solution’.

Hey “quit bitching” AC’s… how does this make us safer?

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re:

> Are you really so stupid that you don’t
> understand the difference?

There actually is no difference. Vehicle checkpoints can be just as essential to national security as airport gropings.

In fact, unlike the crotch-grabbing TSA program, there have been actual verifiable terrorist acts stopped by vehicle inspections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Ressam

So if having your junk jiggled is necessary for national security, then certainly having your car searched at the whim of the government can’t be argued with.

ladyserenakitty (profile) says:

Are you serious? I’ve driven through the El Paso checkpoints many times. Border Patrol checkpoints are a joke. Its usually just a guy asking “Y’alls American citizens?” There was only one time I got questioned with an odd series of questions.

“Where ya headed?” “San Antonio.”
“What business ya got there?” “I live there.”
“Do you live in San Antonio?” “I just told you I live there.”
“Is this your car?” “Damn straight it is!”
“Is this car registered in Texas?” *pointing to the Texas registration sticker* “Sure is!”
“Y’alls not a terrist, is ya?” *confused*
“Git on and have a good day.”

Hugh Mann (profile) says:

You play the lotto?

I’m not sure of your math re groping. If you opt out of the naked scanner, your chances of being groped are 100%. If you strike your submissive pose for the camera, your chances of being groped likely approach zero.

And to the poster who noted that you have three choices (i.e., backscatter scanner, pat-down or metal detector), the availability of just the metal detector is being reduced, and you have no control over being directed through the naked scanner, at which point your choices are reduced to two: naked pictures or groping.

HM

Hugh Mann (profile) says:

You play the lotto?

I’m not sure of your math re groping. If you opt out of the naked scanner, your chances of being groped are 100%. If you strike your submissive pose for the camera, your chances of being groped likely approach zero.

And to the poster who noted that you have three choices (i.e., backscatter scanner, pat-down or metal detector), the availability of just the metal detector is being reduced, and you have no control over being directed through the naked scanner, at which point your choices are reduced to two: naked pictures or groping.

HM

Cloksin (profile) says:

Who needs massage parlors anymore?

Reminds me of this.

… He grasped me firmly, but gently, just above my elbow and guided me
into a room, his room.

Then he quietly shut the door and we were alone.

He approached me soundlessly, from behind, and spoke in a low,
reassuring voice close to my ear, “Just relax.”

Without warning, he reached down and I felt his strong, calloused hands
start at my ankles, gently probing, and moving upward along my calves,
slowly but steadily.

My breath caught in my throat.

I knew I should be afraid, but somehow I didn’t care. His touch was so
experienced, so sure.

When his hands moved up onto my thighs, I gave a slight shudder, and
partly closed my eyes. My pulse was pounding.

I felt his knowing fingers caress my abdomen, my ribcage.

And then, as he cupped my firm, full breasts in his hands, I inhaled
sharply.

Probing, searching, knowing what he wanted, he brought his hands to my
shoulders, slid them down my tingling spine and into my panties.

Although I knew nothing about this man, I felt oddly trusting and
expectant.

This is a man, I thought. A man used to taking charge. A man not used to
taking ‘No’ for an answer.

A man who would tell me what he wanted. A man who would look into my
soul and say…………

“Okay ma’am, you can board your flight now.”

author unknown

Anonymous Coward says:

Will no one comment on the blatant sensationalist style this post is written in?

“refused to let the TSA molest and grope her daughter”

Now, i’m not pro-TSA and i think a lot of the “security” changes are a bit heavy handed, but not once when i’ve flown have i felt like myself nor anyone around me was molested or groped.

The issue is such a tricky one to comment on, because while I don’t agree that the TSA should have (or pretend to have) such a level of authority over US travelers, I also believe we do need to take (appropriate, whatever those may be) measures to safe guard airports.

I also believe that if you want to make a big bold political statement, which objecting to a pat down at the airport is these days (regardless of whether or not you think it should be), you need to be willing to accept the consequences. What this woman taught her daughter was that if she sees something she doesn’t like, she needs to drop everything and make a spectacle over it, in the name of “Standing up for yourself”.

I’d like to say if the woman made her case in a more calm, collected manner, she wouldn’t have had this happen to her, but the reality of the situation is that any refusal is most likely going to be met with at least a detainment while they tried to scare her into cooperating (which is not the same thing as an arrest, for better and for worse).

At least if she took a more level headed approach, she would’ve set a better precedent for her daughter to learn from, especially if they were still detained. By teaching the child that in a lose-lose situation, the LAST thing you want to do is give your persecutors more fuel for their fire, she could’ve taught the girl how to better handle herself in a future situation: Stick up for your rights, but do so without giving the hangman enough rope to do what he does best.

Instead, shes taught the girl to be rude and confrontational, and gotten herself a real criminal record to boot.

However, my real problem is this:

The man wrote this is blatantly coloring this story with his own bias, and he should be held to a higher standard, considering his position within TD – I get that this site is meant to operate like a blog, but coming from the guy at the top? This paints an incredibly unprofessional view of the site, and shows how the author is pandering to a particular audience directly.

Thats a real shame.

AJ says:

Re:

“The man wrote this is blatantly coloring this story with his own bias, and he should be held to a higher standard, considering his position within TD – I get that this site is meant to operate like a blog, but coming from the guy at the top? This paints an incredibly unprofessional view of the site, and shows how the author is pandering to a particular audience directly.”

If you were to read this post all by itself, I could see why you would say the above statement. But we’ve sat back and watched the TSA grope babies, remove adult diapers, explode colostomy bags, remove prosthetic limbs, embarrass fat asses, “search rape” people in wheelchairs…. and generally walk all over anyone that complained….. keeping that in mind, surely you can understand why someone may not be giving the TSA the benefit of the doubt when someone gets upset at them… just saying….

Chris Rhodes (profile) says:

Re:

They can make any rules that they want.

If you mean the airlines, I agree. At least then we can decide to vote with our dollars and choose the airline who treats us the best.

But if you mean the government, I think you’re off base. Saying it’s okay for them to violate your rights in one situation, because you can choose to put yourself in different situation instead is a slippery slope. The TSA is already starting to handle security for other forms of travel. What happens when they get around to all the other items on your list?

Chris Rhodes (profile) says:

Re:

Instead, shes taught the girl to be rude and confrontational

I want more people to be confrontational towards the assholes in government who think they own us. You won’t change anything by knuckling under now and then complaining after the fact; the people who you are protesting are the same people who will hear your complaint and decide its merits.

Ian says:

Meh, if you don’t like the screenings then don’t fly, it’s as simple as that. This is privilege, not a right.

I’m sure the same people who fear their own government would turn about face and immediately blame the government for not doing enough to protect our airlines should another terrorist attack occur.

The attitude reminds me of being in an IT department; If they’re doing their job, everyone whines that its too expensive and redundant. But when something goes wrong, it’s all IT’s (government’s) fault.

Very convenient.

FuzzyDuck says:

Disorderly conduct?

> TSA agents say she became belligerent and verbally abusive. The woman was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct.

That’s probably not true, they just made that up to have an excuse to arrest her. We have seen plenty examples of such false accusations by the police, I am sure the TSA would do it to.

Tom (profile) says:

That’s what’s so great about us Americans, we want it both ways. We don’t want to be inconvenienced in any way, but as soon as a plane gets in the hands of a terrorist, we will be rushing to stand in line at the complaint dept. to yell at someone for not doing anything to protect us.

If “groping” was really the issue, I would agree with the woman. But that’s something we’ll never know.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

The man wrote this is blatantly coloring this story with his own bias, and he should be held to a higher standard, considering his position within TD – I get that this site is meant to operate like a blog, but coming from the guy at the top? This paints an incredibly unprofessional view of the site, and shows how the author is pandering to a particular audience directly.

Thats a real shame.

BOOM. Headshot.

Benny6Toes (profile) says:

Re:

Or, you know, you could actually understand that the freedom to travel about the country is a right, not a privilege, and doing so by air has been recognized as a Right in the US Code (not to mention the Supreme Court has upeld this view):

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/49/VII/A/I/401/40103

(a) Sovereignty and Public Right of Transit. – (1) The United
States Government has exclusive sovereignty of airspace of the
United States.
(2) A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit
through the navigable airspace. To further that right, the
Secretary of Transportation shall consult with the Architectural
and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board established under
section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 792)
before prescribing a regulation or issuing an order or procedure
that will have a significant impact on the accessibility of
commercial airports or commercial air transportation for
handicapped individuals.

athe says:

Re:

So what do you expect her to do – allow the search to go forward, then, let’s say that they do touch her daughter inappropriately, complain (or “whine” in your parlance)? Chances are she would still be arrested for disorderly conduct.

What would be your view after the event?

Way to belittle a person for standing up for their constitutional rights (FYI, I’m not from the US, but I do understand how things work).

Bruce Ediger (profile) says:

Re:

Mike writes: “Such is the life of a professional liar,”

What do you know that we don’t? I really wish the on-line-shill phenomenon had a logical way out, that let people who ran the forums (who actually act ethically about anonymous comments) denounce the real shills.

Unfortunately, I don’t see a way out of it. So “Blogger Bob” gets to run his keyboard like a weedeater on rocket fuel under the anonymous coward flag, and everybody just gets to call him a shill.

Any Mouse (profile) says:

Re:

This is not necessarily true. The tailplane is more to balance the plane and provide control, but is not a ‘weight’ to ‘keep the nose up.’ Often it does the exact opposite, providing a nose-down force during gusts, and helping to stabilize center of gravity in flight. It is entirely possible to fly and land without the tail, but it would take a great bit of flying to do it.

Also, corkscrewing? Not because the tail is missing…

Any Mouse (profile) says:

Re:

There is a huge stretch between teaching someone to be ‘rude and confrontational,’ and teaching them to stand for what you feel is right. How do you know she wasn’t level-headed in the beginning? Were you there?

And we have two versions of how she reacted. Either she ‘stated firmly and loudly,’ or she ‘screamed obscenities and verbal abuse,’ depending on who wrote it. The first sounds like they are taking the woman’s side, the second sounds like the TSA ‘CMA’ version.

hmm (profile) says:

I know how to kill you all!!!!!!!

Firstly I get a terrorist with half a brain (literally) to plant plastic explosives where the missing hemisphere would be.

THEN (muhahaha) I get him to the airport and phone homeland security and tell them what I’ve done!

Then the TSA will have to cut the heads off random passengers and open their skulls with hammers just to “ensure no-one is killed on this flight”………

Ccomp5950 (profile) says:

Re: You play the lotto?

No one ever advocated getting rid of security. Mainly what is targeted here is the illegal searches. No one should have to be groped or photographed by a low-quality-cancer-inducing-porno-camera.

Probably cause? Fine, send them on through. Just wanting to get from point a to point b? Check their bags, and let them on their way.

Frost (profile) says:

You're living in a fascist or proto-fascist state.

It’s not conclusively so that America is a fascist state, but it is at the very least a nation teetering on the edge and headed that way. The parallels between America of today and, say, Europe in the 1920s-1930’s are legion.

Something to be concerned about. For now, at least there are still a few people who are outraged at the thought of having their fourth and fifth amendment rights abridged. Pretty soon it will be par for the course…

Paul OFlaherty (user link) says:

Terrorists Are Smarter Than This

Oddly enough, the behavior of the TSA and the ever increasing lines at airports provide terrorists with a much juicer target than an aircraft with perhaps 250+ people on-board.

The *smart* terrorist will just detonate a device in the queues near the security screening areas and get far, far more people in the process…

But now that I’ve said that, I’m probably marked as a terrorist for pointing it out…

1amWendy (user link) says:

Freedom to Travel - we WANT it

We are Freedom to Travel USA, an organization dedicated to regaining freedoms taken away from us by the TSA. We believe that suspicionless unwanted touching should not be a condition of travel. We believe that being subject to the equivalent of Peeping Toms without cause should not be a condition of travel. We believe that exposing ourselves to radiation, however small, should not be a condition of travel. We believe that merely the presence of medical metal, in and of itself, should not constitute “probable cause.” h t t p : / / fttusa . org

klompenmaker (profile) says:

We are all accused criminals, don't you see?

TSA gropings have little or nothing to do with security – it’s all about demonstrating to the world that that all Americans are not just accused, but convicted criminals.

We must all be groped because we are all convicted racists guilty of profiling dark-skinned Middle Eastern Muslim males and oppressing people from poor countries.

For this reason:

1. We must grope children and grandmothers to provide constant ongoing evidence that we are not racial profiling.
2. Being groped makes some small atonement for our past sins of being racist oppressors.
3. We need to be taught a lesson that America has been a force of evil, oppression, and greater unfairness in the world.

Anyone who doesn’t accept, even embrace being groped willingly is obviously a bitter clinger to outmoded values and should be placed on a watch list.

And if a TSA agent is able to grab a few iPads and other goodies to stuff down his own pants in the process, that just helps advance the cause of punishing the guilty oppressors.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop ยป

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...