Problems with the TSA • Hacker News Board

Re: Problems with the TSA

#61

Post by bgrainger » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 2:58 AM UTC

clebio wrote: post #18

w1ntermute wrote: post #6

We complain about the TSA on here all the time, but it's important to remember that the average American sees absolutely nothing wrong with what the TSA does. They genuinely and wholeheartedly believe that the TSA is helping to make the skies safer for Americans, and that it is doing so without violating any civil liberties. The idea that "if you have nothing to hide, why do you care if the authorities search you?" i…

Do you have some evidence for this assertion? I see it commonly given here -- treated almost axiomatically -- but is there any actual evidence that 'the average American sees absolutely nothing wrong'? Or are we just assuming we know the mind of 'average' American... and that we are not they... and that they are simple, and complacent? Public education would lead to... what... mass civil disobedience against the TSA'…

I found it interesting to read the comments on the blog post where the TSA announced they would stop confiscating pocketknives (effective April 25): http://blog.tsa.gov/2013/03/small-pocket-knives-more-support...

Instead of celebrating this as a victory for common sense, many commenters argued against the change, claiming it would make flights less safe (or at least feel less safe). I think these people are representative of a significant fraction of the population who think the TSA's work is both necessary and effective, and would oppose limiting it any further.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#62

Post by bgrainger » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:00 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #58

w1ntermute wrote: post #6

We complain about the TSA on here all the time, but it's important to remember that the average American sees absolutely nothing wrong with what the TSA does. They genuinely and wholeheartedly believe that the TSA is helping to make the skies safer for Americans, and that it is doing so without violating any civil liberties. The idea that "if you have nothing to hide, why do you care if the authorities search you?" i…

Yes! I commented a few weeks ago about listening to an NPR ToTN segment about the loosening of the pocketknife ban. ToTN even got a guest for the duration of the segment to argue the case for relaxing TSA regulations. As I recall: every caller called to complain that the TSA was relaxing requirements.

Similarly, many commenters on the TSA's blog post announcing this change opposed it: http://blog.tsa.gov/2013/03/small-pocket-knives-more-support...

Re: Problems with the TSA

#63

Post by trust-me » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:01 AM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #41

javert wrote: post #4

My mother can't travel by plane, because she has aphasia (can't speak) and a leg brace, due to her stroke. If I go through the airport with her, there is no guarantee the agents will let me stay with her and explain the situation. She can't remove the leg brace on her own for them to make sure it's not a weapon, and TSA agents can't do it properly. So, basically, taking her to the airport is a recipe for having her v…

The TSA is a direct, overt violation of the 4th amendment (search and seizure). Thus, the US federal government is not legitimate under the US Constitution. Don't be so fucking stupid. Apart from the obvious argument that flying is a privilege and not a right, and that you don't need to fly (however impractical this is), even if you were right on the 4th amendment argument it doesn't mean 'the US federal government i…

USSR existed for 69 years, no major battles were brought over institutions like KGB, that were breaking the democratic soviet constitution.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#64

Post by Samuel_Michon » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:01 AM UTC

DannyBee wrote: post #56

I was with him until I watched the actual video, where he basically comes off like a guy deliberately looking for a fight who gets one. He tries to pull the "i don't have to explain why it's a medically necessary liquid, you fuckers should screen it". All they did was ask why it was medically necessary, which is reasonable, in order to prevent people from abusing the policy. His citation that the special needs memo s…

“All they did was ask why it was medically necessary”

If he had explained all the ins and outs of his illness, then what? Are they in any position to judge the necessity of him drinking sugar water? If not, what's the use of explaining it to them? They should know their own rules and act accordingly. It's unacceptable for them to make someone wait for 20 minutes while they look up what they should already know.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#65

Post by zobzu » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:04 AM UTC

coudron wrote: post #44

Wow. Was thinking Sai had a logical complaint until I watched the video of him interacting with the TSA (or whatever company does security in SFO). It's clear by the video, he was trying to troll TSA rather than get through security with his medical liquids. He can't expect to not justify and explain why his liquids are considered medical. Otherwise, every person who paid $4.50 for a soda before security would just p…

I think the issue is just that the TSA policy is not "good enough"

And that's exactly how people see americans, by the way. Some random dudes try to piss of a bunch of people, and maybe make some money in court, because a document, law, whatever didn't specify something that was common sense.

Then you end up with ridiculously long documents that attempt to cover every single tiny case - and of course, generally taking the road "against" the consumer, customer, whatever - because it's _safer_.

So yeah. By watching the video, the guy does appear as a douche. He should just ask TSA to make their papers clearer about the policy. He could also split his liquids into smaller liquids or just bring the doctor note. But nooope.. let's piss off TSA to "make a point". Except, it's not a very good point.

--

For the record I travel through the US every now and then, and I bring sensitive items, that always get scanned, but always go through. I sometimes even get this little "TSA inspected this bag" from checked-in luggage due to the contents.

Never had any issue. But such behavior, I fear, actually work toward restricting all items I travel with, and thus, effectively forbidding me travel with those in the future.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#66

Post by themgt » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:04 AM UTC

DannyBee wrote: post #56

I was with him until I watched the actual video, where he basically comes off like a guy deliberately looking for a fight who gets one. He tries to pull the "i don't have to explain why it's a medically necessary liquid, you fuckers should screen it". All they did was ask why it was medically necessary, which is reasonable, in order to prevent people from abusing the policy. His citation that the special needs memo s…

TSA contractors have absolutely no right to demand intimate medical information from people who simply wish to travel through the air. The fact that you would think otherwise is a symptom of how unhinged the thinking in this country has become.

They prohibited him from drinking juice. He asked to be allowed to drink it in front of them, and they said no. What in the fuck is anyone from anywhere doing telling anyone they aren't allowed to drink juice?

If you answer "safety" or "the law" or really anything, you are utterly, utterly lost.

This is wrong.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#67

Post by iandanforth » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:05 AM UTC

DannyBee wrote: post #56

I was with him until I watched the actual video, where he basically comes off like a guy deliberately looking for a fight who gets one. He tries to pull the "i don't have to explain why it's a medically necessary liquid, you fuckers should screen it". All they did was ask why it was medically necessary, which is reasonable, in order to prevent people from abusing the policy. His citation that the special needs memo s…

I'm not sure what video you watched. Here's a guy who, to the extent of his non-lawyer knowledge, stands up for his rights in the face of bureaucratic harassment. He doesn't yell, scream, or cry, he just insists on people following their own rules, not having his possessions taken, and being treated like a citizen whose rights should be respected.

The above comment implies that it is reasonable for TSA contractors to inquire about medical conditions. That is a huge grant of personal information no one should have to make. The above comment also makes the assumption that instead of authority proving it has a need to restrict rights, individuals must prove they deserve freedoms. It is that reversal of attitudes that scares me more than anything.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#68

Post by trust-me » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:06 AM UTC

ShabbyDoo wrote: post #55

I have a prosthetic leg and travel weekly. Apparently, the TSA's official policy is (or at least was) that, if asked my me if I am allowed to remove my leg and place it on the x-ray conveyor belt, they are to tell me doing so is forbidden. However, if I simply do so, they are not to stop me. I presume the theory to be that travelers might somehow mis-understand and create a PR disaster by claiming that an amputee was…

"Apparently, the TSA's official policy is (or at least was) that, if asked my me if I am allowed to remove my leg and place it on the x-ray conveyor belt, they are to tell me doing so is forbidden. However, if I simply do so, they are not to stop me. I presume the theory to be that travelers might somehow mis-understand and create a PR disaster by claiming that an amputee was forced to remove his leg."

Wow, I was reading a few books on USSR lately and this is exactly how the soviet low enforcement functioned. It's very hard for servicemen to find balance between common sense and social traditions on one side and the madness of totalitarian authority.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#69

Post by cj » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:06 AM UTC

Samuel_Michon wrote: post #54

cj wrote: post #40

I really don't like most of the TSA's procedures either, but watching the hidden camera video, it seems like the OP went in to the situation expecting to have an issue with the TSA. If you approach the TSA adversarially, it's logical that they'd respond unpleasantly. OP: In a patronizing tone : "You're required to accept it, and to screen it. You have the means available to screen it, namely xray and explosive trace…

“If you approach the TSA adversarially, it's logical that they'd respond unpleasantly.” Why? Aren't they trained to deal with all kinds of people and types of behavior, like anyone in a customer facing profession? If I go to an Apple Store to buy a product while I'm in a bad mood and don't feel up for chit-chat, the sales rep isn't going to make me play nice. Also, I think Sai was very courteous and patient, given th…

If a cop stops you on the street because he thinks you look suspicious, how do you respond?

1) "It's none of your business. I'm going to start recording you to make sure you handle this situation legally"

2) "I'm just rolling a cigarette. Don't worry it's not weed!"

Although most people don't like answering to authority, especially when they aren't required to, option #2 is the path of least resistance. That said, I do respect people like the OP who take the first approach and challenge authority.

Re: Problems with the TSA

#70

Post by dthunt » Sun, Mar 31, 2013, 3:08 AM UTC

coudron wrote: post #51

dthunt wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context is important. Speech by choice is very different than being unlawfully questioned and to have your possessions, medical liquid or otherwise, held hostage contingent on your reply.

I think it's safe to say juice is traditionally not considered a medical liquid. In that situation, he is asking for an exception. It is his requirement to justify the request that his juice should be considered a medial liquid. It's unreasonable to say that he shouldn't have to justify its reclassification as a medical liquid without a few facts and disclosing a few details of his situation. Otherwise, every person…

I might agree, if juice were a regulated substance, and if people were required to walk around with documentation about their medical issues.

As far as reasonability - he's correct in noting that the TSA is not entitled to your medical history. Moreover, TSA screeners are generally not doctors (some may be), they're not YOUR doctor, and they're certainly not in a position to decide what is or isn't medically necessary for you.

Does this mean that you should be able to get your juice past security by claiming to have a medical condition? No.

It means you should be able to do that without having to disclose anything about your health, and the only remedy that should be available is for the TSA to screen the liquid if they feel it is necessary to ensure passenger safety.

Is that unfair? Maybe, but so is a ridiculous ban on a liter bottle of safe substances.