If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chicago Tribune)   You can't touch this, Part II: Man who refused airport screening fined   (chicagotribune.com) divider line 661
    More: Followup, civil penalty, airport security, Lindbergh Field, freedom of movement, TSA  
•       •       •

24030 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Nov 2010 at 2:32 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



661 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-11-16 12:05:26 PM
"What he's done, he's violated federal law and federal regulations which states once you enter and start the process you have to complete it," said Michael Aguilar.

Wait, which is it? You clearly have the right to opt out -- and they put up signs to that effect -- except that you don't?
 
2010-11-16 12:08:58 PM
gaslight: Wait, which is it? You clearly have the right to opt out -- and they put up signs to that effect -- except that you don't?

Apparently you get to opt out of the electronic scanning, but then you'll be frisked.
 
2010-11-16 12:13:34 PM
Sounds like they really need to put up signs in airports clearly indicating the "point of no return."
 
2010-11-16 12:14:23 PM
R.A.Danny: gaslight: Wait, which is it? You clearly have the right to opt out -- and they put up signs to that effect -- except that you don't?

Apparently you get to opt out of the electronic scanning, but then you'll be frisked.


Makes sense. Honestly, I'd rather get felt up every time I get on a plane than hear any more about this asshat. There's a right way and a passive agressive biatch way to protest this kind of stuff. They should fine him also for clogging up my internet news. Like a dollar per day I have to hear about him.
 
2010-11-16 12:20:11 PM
Horseshiat. We've become a nation afraid of toothpaste and hair gel. I can have two 3-oz bottles of liquid, but not a 6-oz? Heckuva job, Janet.
 
2010-11-16 12:24:45 PM
Yet another reason to never ever fly commercial.
 
2010-11-16 12:30:09 PM
Marcus Aurelius: Yet another reason to never ever fly commercial.

Yeah, I have all kinds of alternatives.

Unemployment or 6 day car rides.
 
2010-11-16 12:35:52 PM
Submitter needs to read the article; he MIGHT be fined, if the TSA goes ahead with a suit against him.

I don't know what the big deal about the scanner is, if you have nothing to hide. It's not like the TSA employees are standing right in front of you pointing and giggling...
 
2010-11-16 12:38:46 PM
Wait... they will actually grope your privates? Damn, I haven't had to fly in years... I need to book a flight to somewhere; its probably cheaper than a hooker and its legal. Hell, it's federally funded.
 
2010-11-16 12:43:04 PM
Debby7813: Submitter needs to read the article; he MIGHT be fined, if the TSA goes ahead with a suit against him.

I don't know what the big deal about the scanner is, if you have nothing to hide. It's not like the TSA employees are standing right in front of you pointing and giggling...


Debby, It's about the Federal Government telling you you have to get naked to go see Grandma. Horseshiat. Follow the money and figure out who this really benefits. Then, for fun, read the Constitution. You have rights preventing the sort of intrusion you claim is okay.
 
2010-11-16 12:44:54 PM
HAMMERTIME
 
2010-11-16 12:47:11 PM
the scanners are unlawful search
the pat-downs are unlawful seizure*

*giggiy
 
2010-11-16 01:03:57 PM
Spad31: I can have two 3-oz bottles of liquid, but not a 6-oz? Heckuva job, Janet.

If you want to take a 6 oz bottle, just mark it as medical. For example, if you want to take a nalgene bottle full of water, mark it "saline solution". There are exceptions for medical supplies.
 
2010-11-16 01:13:21 PM
Can't this be a test case for the bullshiat TSA regulations? the guy might not have the money to fight it but I'm sure someone has been salivating at the thought of biatch slapping this government agency. I can't just be me.
 
2010-11-16 01:15:54 PM
Gwendolyn: Can't this be a test case for the bullshiat TSA regulations? the guy might not have the money to fight it but I'm sure someone has been salivating at the thought of biatch slapping this government agency. I can't just be me.

I'm hoping the ACLU or some such pinko organization picks up on this
 
2010-11-16 01:19:12 PM
R.A.Danny: I'm hoping the ACLU or some such pinko organization picks up on this

ACLU: destroying America (until *you* need *your* rights defended)
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2010-11-16 01:22:23 PM
Spad31: You have rights preventing the sort of intrusion you claim is okay.

It's too bad you didn't give a flying fark about the Constitution during Bush's domestic wiretaps: "And, no, none of you are being "spied" upon. Silliness and tinfoil."
 
2010-11-16 02:03:46 PM
I don't always agree with the ACLU but I do support them. Either those guys or EPIC will be all over this, I think they have been waiting for a "test" case to show up on their doorstep.
 
2010-11-16 02:10:29 PM
doglover: R.A.Danny: gaslight: Wait, which is it? You clearly have the right to opt out -- and they put up signs to that effect -- except that you don't?

Apparently you get to opt out of the electronic scanning, but then you'll be frisked.

Makes sense. Honestly, I'd rather get felt up every time I get on a plane than hear any more about this asshat. There's a right way and a passive agressive biatch way to protest this kind of stuff. They should fine him also for clogging up my internet news. Like a dollar per day I have to hear about him.


I don't get the "asshat" part of what this guy did. Would be he still be an asshat if he hadn't recorded it? Was it the refusal that made him an asshat, or the recording of his refusal?

At what exact point in the encounter did he become an asshat, and why?
 
2010-11-16 02:14:59 PM
pudding7: I don't get the "asshat" part of what this guy did. Would be he still be an asshat if he hadn't recorded it? Was it the refusal that made him an asshat, or the recording of his refusal?

He went into this fully intent on causing a ruckus. I agree completely on the feelings about the screening, but he was sensationalizing and AWing.

Now if he got a few hundred of his friends to do this with him, or perhaps a FB group of tens of thousands, all clogging up airports across the country, he'd be a hero.
 
2010-11-16 02:20:59 PM
R.A.Danny: pudding7: I don't get the "asshat" part of what this guy did. Would be he still be an asshat if he hadn't recorded it? Was it the refusal that made him an asshat, or the recording of his refusal?

He went into this fully intent on causing a ruckus. I agree completely on the feelings about the screening, but he was sensationalizing and AWing.

Now if he got a few hundred of his friends to do this with him, or perhaps a FB group of tens of thousands, all clogging up airports across the country, he'd be a hero.


What ruckus did he cause, than anyone else who refused like he did wouldn't also cause? Is anyone who refuses the pat-down also going to be an asshat, because I really can't imagine it going any smoother. No raised voices, no hysterics from him or the TSA, everybody was calm and collected and professional.

Could he have refused like he did, and NOT been an asshat?
 
2010-11-16 02:25:34 PM
Also, I think the whole issue with the pat-down will go on, regardless of the video. But I think the biggest result of this guy's video is the revelation about the $10,000 fine for not completing the screening.

TSA can keep doing their stupid scans and pat-downs, but they're going to have to put up some signs or shiat if they really want to fine people $10,000 for refusing the whole process.
 
2010-11-16 02:26:34 PM
Let me simplify the TSA perspective on this.

1. Assume everyone is guilty.
2. There is no step 2.

Sadly, the terrorist have won (for now).
 
2010-11-16 02:26:43 PM
pudding7: Could he have refused like he did, and NOT been an asshat?

Probably not. Mind you, asshat is far milder than asshole, scumbag, or cocksucking bastard, and is by no means all bad.
 
2010-11-16 02:30:39 PM
FTA: "We conduct our screenings under the auspices of the 4th amendment...constitution of the 4th amendment that allows us to do administrative screenings and searches."

i224.photobucket.com

THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY
 
2010-11-16 02:33:26 PM
BigTuna: FTA: "We conduct our screenings under the auspices of the 4th amendment...constitution of the 4th amendment that allows us to do administrative screenings and searches."



THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY


They're trying to shove "Implied consent" down our throats.

Next time someone calls me paranoid for using the term "slippery slope" I'm gonna pull their nuts off through their monitor.
 
2010-11-16 02:37:11 PM
jbc: Spad31: You have rights preventing the sort of intrusion you claim is okay.

It's too bad you didn't give a flying fark about the Constitution during Bush's domestic wiretaps: "And, no, none of you are being "spied" upon. Silliness and tinfoil."


But they will still avoid tinfoil, until it becomes mainstream.
 
2010-11-16 02:37:13 PM
Huck Chaser: Sounds like they really need to put up signs in airports clearly indicating the "point of no return."

And have a bottle of lube dangling from the sign.
 
2010-11-16 02:37:23 PM
theintelhub.com

I don't know why, but... I think... I think I love them.

/So what am I so afraid of?
 
2010-11-16 02:37:51 PM
Debby7813:

I don't know what the big deal about the scanner is, if you have nothing to hide.


If you have nothing to hide, can we have a cameraman follow you around and record you at all times, and put up cameras in all areas of your home but the bathrooms and bedrooms? You've got nothing to hide so obviously you won't mind having your privacy ripped away from you or anything.
 
2010-11-16 02:37:54 PM
easy solution minus the cancer thingNSFW (new window)
 
2010-11-16 02:38:44 PM
the TSA has a procedure in place that blocks out the groin area on a full body scan.

Then what's the farking point of doing it in the first place?
 
2010-11-16 02:39:42 PM
So implied consent applies to sexual molestation in California now?
 
2010-11-16 02:39:48 PM
"What he's done, he's violated federal law and federal regulations which states once you enter and start the process you have to complete it," said Michael Aguilar.

FARK YOU MIKEY! The process was completed when they told him to basically take a hike.
 
2010-11-16 02:39:59 PM
submitter fail...
 
2010-11-16 02:40:08 PM
So what happens after all the new precautions set in place and someone gets by security checkpoints?

If i am getting a full body scan, my flight better be 100% safe from someone on board with what the TSA "NO FLY ITEMS"
 
2010-11-16 02:40:25 PM
Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: ACLU: destroying America (until *you* need *your* rights defended)

I told my wife this exact thing last night. As much as I detest many of the things that the ACLU does and stands for, I see them as the "one good hope" of squashing the TSA.

God Help Us All.
 
2010-11-16 02:40:34 PM
clearly he was just a shiat disturber. who goes to South Dakota for a vacation?
 
2010-11-16 02:40:47 PM
Security at Heathrow airport found a Leatherman in my hand luggage, checked it, measured the three inch blade and then gave it back to me so I could take it on board with me when I flew to Boston earlier this year, so kick getting a, really I am.
 
2010-11-16 02:41:21 PM
R.A.Danny: Next time someone calls me paranoid for using the term "slippery slope" I'm gonna pull their nuts off through their monitor.

"You're paranoid, this isn't a slippery slope" almost always means "I wish you hadn't identified our attempt at incrementalism."
 
2010-11-16 02:41:22 PM
So the 9th Cir Appeals says you can be fined for refusing all screening because otherwise a terrorist could repeatedly attempt to get through security and refuse anytime they feel they were about to be caught.

Seems like it sort of presumes guilt on behalf of the rest of us. Am I liable for the fine when I enter the airport? Get in line at security? What if I leave after the TSA rep has checked my ID but before I put my stuff on the X-ray conveyor?
 
2010-11-16 02:41:32 PM
1. When they grab your junk drop to the ground and curl up in a ball (puke if you can).
2. Make a 'real' police officer arrest them for assault.
3. Claim the TSA flunkie grabbed and twisted.
4. Sue
5. Proffit?
 
2010-11-16 02:41:59 PM
Subby needs to learn the difference between "could be" and "actually was" fined.

There is no indication that he was fined.

Nice try trollmitter

1/10
 
2010-11-16 02:42:02 PM
FTFA:

"I don't know if it was an actual set-up," said Aguilar. "But we are concerned that hte passenger did have his recording taking place prior to entering the checkpoint. So there is some concern that this was intentional on his part."

Well I never. How dare this citizen videotape a controversial procedure millions are expected to undergo in full view in a public place. They should hang him at dawn.
 
2010-11-16 02:42:38 PM
I can't wait for this case to make it to the supreme court. Until these electronic strip search machines are taken out of airports, I refuse to fly.
 
2010-11-16 02:42:44 PM
"We conduct our screenings under the auspices of the 4th amendment...constitution of the 4th amendment that allows us to do administrative screenings and searches."

What a scholar. Obviously a GED in law.
 
2010-11-16 02:42:57 PM
doglover: R.A.Danny: gaslight: Wait, which is it? You clearly have the right to opt out -- and they put up signs to that effect -- except that you don't?

Apparently you get to opt out of the electronic scanning, but then you'll be frisked.

Makes sense. Honestly, I'd rather get felt up every time I get on a plane than hear any more about this asshat. There's a right way and a passive agressive biatch way to protest this kind of stuff. They should fine him also for clogging up my internet news. Like a dollar per day I have to hear about him.


It does make complete sense. Yet then when he chooses to be frisked and then finds out what a frisking entails, his choice is between allowing a TSA agent to feel up his crotch or possibly pay a $11,000 fine. There is no "forget it, I don't want to fly anymore if this is what it requires" option. Does that make sense to you? It doesn't to me.
 
2010-11-16 02:43:07 PM
Pert: Security at Heathrow airport found a Leatherman in my hand luggage, checked it, measured the three inch blade and then gave it back to me so I could take it on board with me when I flew to Boston earlier this year, so kick getting a, really I am.

I got molested by a screener at Heathrow a couple months ago, so I'm also getting a kick.
 
2010-11-16 02:43:14 PM
Ya know at first I thought this guy was just a huge attention whore. I starting to actually admire him for sticking up for his (our) rights. Regardless of his reasons for doing this what happened and happens about 2 million times a day is going to be examined in a court of law.
 
2010-11-16 02:43:41 PM
knobee: I told my wife this exact thing last night. As much as I detest many of the things that the ACLU does and stands for, I see them as the "one good hope" of squashing the TSA.

You have civil liberties or what? What specific ACLU case do you diasagree with?
 
Displayed 50 of 661 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report