Man Strips Down For TSA, Told He Still Needed To Be Groped; Arrested For Failing To Complete Security Process
from the grope-grope-grope dept
The TSA stories are coming fast and furious these days. The latest takes place (yet again) at the San Diego airport, where a guy first refused to go through the naked image scanner, and when he was told he had to be patted down stripped down to his bicycle underwear, which (as he noted) "left nothing to the imagination." His argument was that at that point, he shouldn't need a pat down, but the TSA ordered him to put his clothes back on so he could be patted down. He argued that they could just go through his clothes. End result? Guy in underwear gets arrested, handcuffed, and escorted through the airport in his underwear -- and is being charged with the same thing that the "don't touch my junk" guy was threatened with: "failing to complete the security process." Feeling safer?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: arrests, privacy, searches, security, tsa
Companies: tsa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait for it...
Linkage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I thought we already learned here that you specifically CAN record the police.
Apparently this same guy won a suit for being falsely arrested for open carrying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not videotaping police
I can't provide any links or actual stories but I've read articles (possibly on this site) about how it's illegal to record SOUND of the police. Just video taping would be ok, but as soon as they find out you're getting audio too that's when they get REALLY upset.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not videotaping police
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not videotaping police
> security procedures" that's illegal in this case.
Under federal law, if you're legally allowed to be where you are, you can photograph what you can see.
If the Secret Service can't stop people from taking pictures of their equipment and procedures in public, the TSA sure can't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Not videotaping police
The guy getting arrested might disagree with you there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not videotaping police
And the judge will disagree with the TSA if he's doing his job properly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Damn
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Damn
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well....
I mean, as long as I'm being violated I might as well make as big a mockery of the entire process as possible....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Well....
Not exactly an ideal way, but I do have A way:
1. Bring extra pants and underwear in carry on
2. Drink lots of water and beans
3. As they rub your nuts, relieve the pressure in your bladder and act like you had an orgasm.
4. as they grab your rear, let the beans erupt and state "Sorry, I should not have had that last burito"
5. Thank them for their "service" that left you feeling "wonderful"
6. Change in the bathroom, then board your plane.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Well....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Well....
I will have my own "glove" on while being groped, I seriously doubt I will be the one em-barr-assed unless I get lucky....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Well....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Well....
1 can Campbells Cream of mushroom soup (Do not strain, we want the chunks)
1 sharply filed fingernail
Cream your shorts at appropriate time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well....
wow you are sick man
http://southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com/images/shows/south-park/clip-thumbnails/season-16/1601/sou th-park-s16e01c07-mind-if-i-touch-your-balls-sir-16x9.jpg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nor is it worth it, even if the flight were free.
This is a violation of my rights and I will not submit to such a search.
Understand that I have no desire to bomb or in any way threaten anyone that would fly. I have little or no patience for those that would set up banana republics, wherever they are found.
With the government supporting these actions I am left with one thought...
When will the national flag be changed and when will the national symbol become the banana?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can feel it in your gut, your soul and your conscience that this entire procedure is just wrong. Those defending it know it too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "wrong"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/going-commando.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium =rss&utm_campaign=rss
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's go ethnic...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's go ethnic...
Fortunately, I never enter an airport without being at least a little drunk, so all I'll need to procure is the meat....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Let's go ethnic...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is time...
The right to bear arms was given to us so that if the government ever turned against its people, the people would have the means to rise up, overthrough the corrupt government and establish a new one.
If our founding fathers were with us today, the government would have been overthrown by now. Sadly, we have become compliant sheep who have slowly and methodically given away our individual rights - in the name of fear, the name of laziness and in the name of hedonism.
What will it take to awake the slumbering sheep and make them aware that the sherpherd they've been so blindly following is actually a wolf.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It is time...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Don't clean your crotch area for at least a week before boarding.
But seriously don't travel by air, or don't use American airline companies to travel abroad, go to Mexico and Canada.
Then they will see what good it does.
If there were train bullets in America people would have an option to bad there is nothing like that to accommodate the population.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kilts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Kilts
What I don't understand is with all the comment threads I've been reading on this topic, how can this be the 1st time I've seen this suggestion!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gloves
Are the TSA Agents putting on new gloves between each pat down?
One pair for hundreds of passengers protects the TSA worker, but not the passengers!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gloves
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gloves
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gloves
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gloves
At least one woman reported being selected for a TSA "expanded" search because her menstrual pads showed up as suspicious. The female TSA agent put her hands INSIDE her pants, and did not change her gloves before doing so.
The potential for spreading disease this way is just horrifying.
At this point, exactly what "freedom" do we have left for terrorists to want to destroy? Our government is doing such a good job of taking away our basic rights that there's almost nothing left to lose. Is this the civil rights version of "we had to destroy the village in order to save it?"
I fear for our future as a free nation, since so many citizens have become cowards who happily submit to tyranny. A CBS poll shows about 80% of travelers think the pat-downs and rape-i-scan machines were perfectly okay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
he was also charged with illegally filming
when you can't film law enforcement they have much less to fear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: he was also charged with illegally filming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Worst Part . . .
People in authority (police, politicians, TSA, etc.) absolutely hate being made fools of, and they love to arrest people for filming them, even if the law itself is not on their side, or doesn't even exist.
Disgusting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
your only outnumbered a million to one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They don't want to see if you are carrying anything they want you to be embarrassed.
And now are trying to stop cameras everywhere LoL
Where are the dopes saying this is about security now?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/nov/18/john-pistole/tsa-administrator-cl aims-new-body-scanners-emit-mu/
or even be groped by whoever than be on a plane with some freak with an underwear bomb. Its the price we all have to pay to be safe.
Ounce of prevention is to worth a pound of cure!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Now, there are different types of radiation, and some are absorbed more easily than others, but that's definitely not what is being said here.
It sounds more like someone who didn't understand radiation thought "the machines give a picture outline of your skin, that must mean the radiation is concentrated on the skin".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Take the visible spectrum. Light emitted from a lamp is harmless. Now, concentrate all that light in a tight beam, and you get a "laser" capable of melting steel (or paper at least).
What we did is focus the dispersed photons emitted by the lamp and cram a hell lot of them into a tiny space. This ensures that many many photons will hit a small surface, instead of having a few dispersed photons hitting a large area. More photons equal more energy, which equal more damage.
Not convinced? Try it yourself: Grab a magnifying glass and focus the light on a piece of paper. Just be sure to do that in a safe place, because that paper is going to catch fire right quick.
Now note that, since x-rays are (basically) the same thing as visible light, I can do the same thing with X-rays, and melt you away with an x-ray laser if I wanted. So Green Snowflake anony's scenario is theoretically possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
But it's not the "bounced" or "passed" ones that give you cancer.
TSA: "Oh look it only reflects 1/100000 of an erg of x-rays"
Scientist: "So what happens to the other 999999/100000 ergs of x-rays?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So you're right, we are exposed to microrem while in flight. But just because TSA says "They're safe" doesn't mean they know what they're talking about.
TSA employees are forbidden from wearing hospital style radiation detectors while manning these stations. I wonder why ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes. Keep rationalizing it. Soon you'll be one of the first in line for the brain implants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But no one has proven that the current TSA methods are effective. And even if they are effective for some methods of terrorism, they won't be effective for others. So that groping isn't making you safe.
On the other hand, the odds of being on a plane with someone who plans to detonate a bomb are much lower than the odds of your dieing in an automobile accident -- so, I'm sure you never travel by car, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Underwear bomber
I just thought about this as I was reading about Umar...
I know that the Patriot Act has caused a Secret World to come up, where officials know the info but there's no one pulling it all together.
As I'm seeing it, Umar's British visa was denied while his US visa was approved. Then, to make matters worse, they (federal officials) didn't want to deny it because it would impede on the larger investigation into Al-Qaeda.
So really, how can this be about safety...
When the government has had the knowledge but been unable to connect the dots?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Over-reaction?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Over-reaction?
I can't wait for the next story about another failed terrorist attack where the guy was tackled while trying to light the explosives hidden in his ass. Then we'll have people like you back here in the comment section saying "If you want to be safe while flying, bend over and get anally probed like a man!"
And yes, there is a better way: profiling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Over-reaction?
Oh, I'm sorry, did I ruin your ethnocentric smuggery?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Over-reaction?
Well, I can't speak for other countries, but I have flown out of Ben Gurion and did not exprience any of that. Yes, they went through my luggage but they did their best to repack things. Yes, I had a pat down, but I was never 'groped'. Overall, they were FAR more curteous than anything I experience in my own country. In fact, I would say that I would much rather fly in and out of Israel than I would here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
failing to complete the security process; violation code 7.01
How can they hold you without a charge? Either you are under arrest and they can hold you, or you are not under arrest and should be free to go. I can't think of any other law that forces you to submit to a procedure and prevents you from just leaving.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: failing to complete the security process; violation code 7.01
Much like is the police said "You have to right to not have your house searched without probable cause, but if you decline to let us search your house, we'll take that as probable cause and do it anyway."
Rights are fun!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: failing to complete the security process; violation code 7.01
> searched without probable cause, but if you decline to let us
> search your house, we'll take that as probable cause and do it anyway."
I'd actually love it if some cop did that to me. Talk about winning the lottery. Slam dunk Section 1983 Deprivation of Civil Rights Under Color of Authority suit. Not only could I sue the department/agency he works for, I could sue him personally and take his house from him.
A warrantless search is a small price to pay for a lifetime of financial security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another TSA Travesty
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Examples will be made to stamp out rebellion.
I'm not trying to scare you, but to get you to seriously evaluate what you're up against -- because it's not a video game with instant reset to all as before. The TSA thugs can simply *fabricate* a charge of resisting arrest, which even if doesn't stick all the way to a trial, lands you in jail for a week while family and friends try to scrape up bail, and quite likely gets you fired from your job and otherwise ruins your life (just the arrest record will follow you forever). -- And of course any actual resistance dooms you legally, besides that they may simply shoot you.
It's easy to be a smartass while at your keyboard, but that'll vanish when you're in handcuffs and headed for jail. The police state holds all the cards; all you have is a hope that your fellow citizens will raise a ruckus, instead of chortling gleefully at your attempt to uphold human liberty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Examples will be made to stamp out rebellion.
That, sir, is where you are dead wrong! I vow to be a smartass all the way up to such a time as the TSA may strap me a chair and cause electricity to course through my body until I am dead. Until my final moments, I will toss witty barbs in their direction, mocking their very existence, insulting their lineage, and generally being an exceptionally clever pain in the ass.
Humor is a fine tool in highlighting evil. Something I've learned from my fine Jewish friends....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Examples will be made to stamp out rebellion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Examples will be made to stamp out rebellion.
Ummm... no. The TSA screening agents do not (nor are they authorized to) carry weapons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or perhaps they will get taken out before detonating. A heroic effort, but imagine the repercussions of just a *failed* bombing attempt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
However...
The scanning machines or for that matter other X-Ray machines say at the dentist or hospital do NOT contain radioactive material. The X-Rays are generated by bombaring a metal target with a beam of high voltage electrons. This is known as "Bremsstrahlung radiation" See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremsstrahlung and scroll down to the section "X-ray tube".
So, there would not be a dirty bomb scenario with radioactive materials being spread around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
don't fly
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: don't fly
Several of us will be by shortly to search your home, papers, computer(s), underwear drawers and your person. We may decide to seize anything of interest.
Since when is persona privacy a right?
Since when is being free from warrant-less search and seizure a right?
Either the Constitution of the Unites States is the ultimate law of the land or it isn't There is no gray area.
Is the Constitution dead, or are you just too god-damned lazy to defend it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: don't fly
The fuss is simple, the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND prohibits these searches.
The 4th Amendment from the Bill of Rights states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Wanting to fly on an airplane is not probable cause that someone is a terrorist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: don't fly
On January 5, 2010, SAIC acquired a small company called "Spectrum San Diego" which developed a method to scan cars at high-speed using a technology called CarScan that allows for scanning cars at high speed. In addition to this semi-commercial product, SAIC acquired a number of interesting patents.
Spectrum San Diego Patents (Acquired by SAIC)
Patent: "Video Surveillance System" inventor Steven W Smith, patent 6757008 (Filed Sept 26, 2000 & Granted Jun 29, 2004)
Patent: "Automobile scanning system" inventor Steven Winn Smith, patent 7742568 (Filed Jun 8, 2008 & Granted Jun 22, 2010)
Patent Application: "Dual-mode surveillance system" inventor Steven Winn Smith, application 10/183,619 (Filed Jun 28, 2002)
Patent Application: "High-resolution radiation detector" inventor Steven Winn Smith, application 10/184,125 (Filed Jun 28, 2002)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: don't fly
I love how the government is busy blithely redefining the daily activities of our lives as "privileges" which may be revoked at their whim.
They tell us flying isn't a right and if we don't like it, we can take the train. Now the news tonight is telling me that security checkpoints like the ones in the airports are coming soon to a train station near you.
Don't like it? Don't take the train. That's not a right, after all, is it?
So you're left with driving anywhere you want to go. But wait! Driving is apparently also a "privilege", which they can revoke or upon which they can impose "security" conditions. Don't like it? Don't drive. I guess you can ride a bike, right? 'Cause driving isn't a right, either.
I was in Los Angeles last week and ended up caught in a massive traffic backup on Los Feliz Boulevard, only to find out when I got to the front that it wasn't a wreck or construction causing the problem, but a "security checkpoint". LAPD was pulling over every driver, checking their ID and asking to "do a quick check of the vehicle", which involved popping the trunk and glove compartment. Since they need consent to look in those places, they were "asking" for consent, but the cop who asked me did it in a tone that clearly communicated that she considered it anything but voluntary. What she didn't know was that I was a cop myself, so after I gave her my license and she asked to look in my trunk, I asked why she needed to do that. She said "routinely security check, nothing to worry about, just pop the trunk". I politely told her that I was going to decline to do that unless she could articulate some probable cause for searching my trunk. She mockingly said to her partner, "Oh, look, we have another one playing lawyer over here." I told her that I didn't need to play lawyer because I actually am one, and I'm also a federal agent. At which point I showed her my badge and asked to her to call her supervisor to the scene so that we could have a discussion about her unprofessional behavior and the manner in which she was abusing citizens' 4th Amendment rights.
Amazing how her attitude instantly changed.
The point is, they're now treating *every* mode of travel as a "privilege", which they can revoke at their whim. The whole thing is starting to get a real police state feel to it, and you know it's bad if the cops themselves are starting to worry about the creeping authoritarianism going on out there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
24th of November
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I didn't think about the gloves not being changed out. That can make it worse. We plan to fly across the country early next year and I would hate to have anyone on my family (ranging in ages from newborn to 34) get sick because TSA was feeling us up and not changing their gloves out.
But they don't pat you down without your clothes on, do they? They shouldn't be allowed to touch you nude unless they are at least SUPERVISED by licensed medical professionals. (and I don't mean an on call duty nurse, I mean that the licensed medical professional should be WATCHING if not conducting)
My ex wife lives in the Atlanta area. I live in Arizona. I have to take my kids to see her sometimes so she's not the only one traveling, and I certainly don't want my family exposed to non-hygienic procedures. I almost punched the last doctor who performed a prostate exam when I was getting out of the Army because I had just endured one five weeks earlier and he felt that he, "...wouldn't be doing job if he let go without one." He was far less gentle than the previous doctor and I know the perv did it to violate me. But, alas, I was in the Army and I would have gone to jail and very potentially lost my VA benefits had I assaulted him, even though he assaulted me first.
I know, TMI, but it serves to illustrate my point that even though people are licensed and trained to do the right thing doesn't mean that they can be trusted to do so. At least this urologist had clean gloves and warmed lube. What if the TSA Agent wants to see what I have hidden in my cavities? What about my few-weeks-postpartum wife, newborn son, 4-year-old son, or 11-year-old daughter?
Recording, even filming, the TSA or any other law enforcement agency CANNOT be illegal. Law enforcement personnel MUST be accountable for their actions. Forgive this mostly white guy for saying it, but, "Rodney King, what?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
its a simple decision...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Odd...
link
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Turn the tables
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My only comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: My only comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And a new poll says more Americans against scanners
Funny how when you actually ask people about the naked scanners, they don't feel it's as justified.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Take a Cialis before going on your flight and make sure the TSA guy gets to feel a pounding erection while you groan as if you're enjoying it.
So much the better if its a female.
Also, eating gassy foods and creating a noxious gas cloud while TSA is down feeling your ankles is another win-win situation.
get lemons, make lemonade.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Impressive
Just asking
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Impressive
Then got upset when he said no??
Just asking
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hiring practice
Talk about a stimulus package
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Government of the United States.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just wondering
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
To take away our freedom. But they couldn't have done it by themselves, our govt has helped them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
anyone think that..
I'm also wondering what happens if you decide to get on a plane without washin' the old johnson...if your parts stink to high heaven which TSA is going to want to play have-a-grab?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lawsuits on the horizon..
(a child already scared and frightened can be pretty easily convinced of the sequence of events).
massive lawsuit...even worse publicity...etc...etc.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
link
I think some sort of serious investigation is in order here, because there is only one reason to deliberately take a child out of sight of the parents and that is to sexually or physically abuse the child without the parents catching on that something wrong is happening. ALL of the TSA agents involved need to be immediately suspended from duty pending very serious background checks and investigations.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c68_1255814043
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Enjoy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]