Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

noblasters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 185 posts

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#101

Post by andreyf »

acabal wrote: post #23
swombat wrote: post #9

In the 1500's a man called Étienne de la Boétie wrote, in a then-inflammatory "Discourse on Voluntary Servitude": Obviously there is no need of fighting to overcome this single tyrant, for he is automatically defeated if the country refuses consent to its own enslavement: it is not necessary to deprive him of anything, but simply to give him nothing; there is no need that the country make an effort to do anything for…

A nice quote, but we've already given the TSA a lot. Now it's a fight to get it back. Hopefully it's not too late.

The TSA is obviously staffed by bureaucrats who are simply following bad rules. This should call for a restructuring of the organization, not a lash out against The TSA or (worse) The Government. Let's figure out what is wrong with the process, and how we can fix it. Enough being scared and pointing blame.

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#102

Post by dedward »

kreneskyp wrote: post #78
dedward wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm theorizing here - maybe someone can answer - would the flight & airport in question be laid out such that, once passing through immigration, you were still in the secure area of the airport and able to board another aircraft, or was there a choice between "connecting flights" and "exit". The only rational explanation I can come up with would be if the airport layout demanded this - but it seems unlikely. This als…

You would still be in the secure area. The problem is that coming from an international flight you wouldn't necessarily be groped for explosives. It's a good assumption that if they have explosives on a plane flying over the US, they are going to use it before they land.

The problem then is that the TSA is tasked with protecting an area that also contains people who do not intend to board aircraft - the airport design is faulty - there is no way for people who just need to pass customs and leave the airport to do so without exposing them to the secure departure area. (That shouldn't be an international airport in my book)

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#103

Post by tptacek »

ck2 wrote: post #50

Except he'll probably get a surprise $10k fine (civil lawsuit) a few months from now. For anyone else trying to prevent a gate-rape freedom-fondle, do not try the "less clothes" approach, this one ended with an arrest: http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&... There is also some documentation now that the scanners produce TWENTY times the claimed radiation level: http://holt.house.gov/index.php?opti…

The TSA does not have any statutory authority that I can identify to levy $10k civil fines for no reason.

That number isn't pulled out of thin air; it's from 49 USC § 1503.401, and it's the maximum civil penalty the TSA can assess against anyone who isn't actually operating an aircraft.

In other words, $10k is what the TSA has statutory authority to bill you if you hit a TSA agent.

Meanwhile: the specific list of things that 49 USC § 1540 forbids does not include refusing a search (though it does include attempting to board a flight without being searched).

The TSA has made the authority it is claiming up out of whole cloth, in an effort to keep people from fouling up the lines and making more embarrassing Youtube videos.

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#104

Post by dedward »

syllogism wrote: post #92
dedward wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes a lot of sense. Had someone with authority said "Sir, unfortunately, the way the airport is laid out, you must enter the secured area of the airport in order to leave, and therefore we have to put you through our screening process." then there would be no trouble. Equally less troublesome would have been if the TSA had simply realized this and told the police "No problem, he's not connecting anywhere - ple…

He can still ask to be escorted through the secured area --- which is what seems to have happened.

Yup - and he was offerred this earlier on in the story - though when he pushed the police on the pat-down procedure, they wouldn't commit to anything. They said they "might" have to pat him down before escorting him (which seems reasonable if they are being asked to securely transport him through the facility. While they didn't insist on groping his nads like the TSA does, they couldn't promise that wouldn't happen at all. There was wiggle room there. Had the cops said "We aren't like the TSA -but if we're going to escort you out of the building, we need to pat you down for weapons like we would any other person we're transporting - are you okay with that?" it might have been over.

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#105

Post by gwtw »

acabal wrote: post #23
swombat wrote: post #9

In the 1500's a man called Étienne de la Boétie wrote, in a then-inflammatory "Discourse on Voluntary Servitude": Obviously there is no need of fighting to overcome this single tyrant, for he is automatically defeated if the country refuses consent to its own enslavement: it is not necessary to deprive him of anything, but simply to give him nothing; there is no need that the country make an effort to do anything for…

A nice quote, but we've already given the TSA a lot. Now it's a fight to get it back. Hopefully it's not too late.

The other shoe to drop soon is the "the solution" to this crisis: electronic identity cards and discreet profiling.

What was great about America, regardless of how you view her history, was that it was that one place in this world were people were not continually hassled by the government. Soon we'll need permission from the local police department to change apartments, no doubt. (Alarmist? Am I?)

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#106

Post by slowpoison »

dedward wrote: post #54
obiefernandez wrote: post #39

When you arrive from an international flight at Atlanta airport, you have to go through security to get out of customs because there is no direct exit out to the street. In other words, when you arrive and go through border control and customs, the only way to get out of the airport is to go through the other terminals. I wonder if the same applies at Cincinnati/N. Kentucky airport.

This makes a lot of sense. Had someone with authority said "Sir, unfortunately, the way the airport is laid out, you must enter the secured area of the airport in order to leave, and therefore we have to put you through our screening process." then there would be no trouble. Equally less troublesome would have been if the TSA had simply realized this and told the police "No problem, he's not connecting anywhere - ple…

In that case, pat-down wouldn't have been an option!

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#108

Post by eyeareque »

I wonder, would they have been able to arrest him if he was shooting video within the security area? Is it legal to record the audio of a cop if you inform them about it first?

I need to read up on this before I need to travel again. Someone should create a know your rights quick reference guide for air travel.

Side note: I flew from HK to SF yesterday.. No backscatter machines on re-entry of the US border. When I flew from SFO to HK a couple of weeks ago I was lucky enough to have made it into a line that was only a metal detector. They did have some backscatter machines in place.

Second side note: On my flight home from HK to SFO they had roped off the waiting area at my gate. There were about 6 Muslim men (hats, bears, speaking arabic gave me this impression) waiting in line with the rest of the passengers to get all of our carry on items physically searched before our flight. I'm sure the extra screening was not due to their being on the flight /sarcasm. I over heard some of the men speaking about how they can fly anywhere in the world and don't have a problem. But as soon as they fly to the US, they get harassed up and down. I truly felt sorry for them.

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#109

Post by mthoms »

morganpyne wrote: post #17

I find it appalling that US citizens are forced to such measures to enforce their rights and I'm glad that there are people both patient and stubborn enough to play out scenarios like this. However, as a non-US citizen I always wonder to myself when reading such stories if there are any international rights/laws that may be applicable when entering the States as a foreigner? My understanding is that there are absolut…

I believe you are correct that there are no limits to what U.S. Customs can do so long as you are being processed within the physical borders of the United States.

At a land crossing, once you attempt to gain entry you cannot simply decide "it's not worth it" anymore and return back to the originating country. You have no rights, not even the right to turn around and leave.

In an airport setting (most mid-sized and larger Canadian airports have US Customs processing stations before you depart), you can indeed decide to turn around and not proceed with the crossing.

From a legal standpoint I believe it has to do with the fact that at a land crossing you are already on U.S. soil by the time you reach Customs. In the airport scenario above you are subject to the laws of the originating country since you haven't left their territory.

It goes without saying that refusing to proceed with a crossing at an airport once it has commenced would likely have other very serious implications. The local authorities would almost certainly want to have a word with you and you'd be flagged by U.S. Customs as suspicious.

Re: Re-entry to US without backscatter or pat-down

#110

Post by ugh »

aneth wrote: post #83
jacquesm wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In other countries this idiocy would not have taken place to begin with.

If you refuse to cooperate with security in England, Germany, France, Italy, China, Burma, India, or any other place I can imagine, you would not have a policeman calmly understanding of how you were asserting your constitutional rights.

What makes you say that?
Post reply on HN