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

TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

thetravel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 145 posts

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#101

Post by 0xTJ »

Chris2048 wrote: post #86
0xTJ wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a female agent, that doesn't mean that it's okay to start groping someone without warning.

You phrased it as "If you're not going to get consent to grope girls", so why is it relevant that she is female?

Mostly to make a point; more people are likely to care about it not being okay if it's phrased that way. (Something, something, toxic masculinity, "suck it up tough guy, can't handle a little pat-down?")

The fact that the TSA agent a woman doesn't automatically make someone else comfortable with whatever liberties the agent feels like taking. It's still likely worse if it's a man doing it, but sharing a gender isn't an excuse for the agent to do whatever they want.

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#102

Post by ceejayoz »

kube-system wrote: post #83
ceejayoz wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Airlines could have locked cockpit doors and prohibited passengers from bringing box cutters on their airplanes 30 years ago, but they didn't, even though hijackings regularly happened. Yes, because in most cases the hijackers would demand you land, negotiate, and either get some sort of asylum deal or get shot. Big inconvenience, but usually not much bloodshed. 9/11 changed the math for the people on the plane a l…

Yeah, exactly, the security posture was simply to accept the risk because it was presumed to be small. A hijacking is an archetypal security failure, but airlines chose not to add friction to their operations to prevent them. It's the Ford Pinto cost-benefit analysis scandal of the sky.

The fairly reasonable concern was that it’d turn relatively peaceful events into massacres.

Too much security can be a problem just like too little can.

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#103

Post by wat10000 »

lokar wrote: post #95
nostrademons wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TSA was never necessary, it was all theater to begin with. The median number of terrorism deaths per year in the U.S. for all years between 1970-2017 was 4 [1]. You have always been about 10x more likely to die from being struck by lightning than by being killed by a terrorist. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States... .

And for 9/11, the only change that actually matters is strengthening the cockpit door and keeping it locked.

That, and the knowledge that hijackers are going to kill you, so you need to fight back. 9/11 only worked because the passengers on three of the planes "knew" that being compliant was their best chance of survival in a hijacking. When passengers on the fourth plane discovered this was no longer the case, they foiled the attack.

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#104

Post by ninjin »

lokar wrote: post #89
ekjhgkejhgk wrote: post #39

I flew to the USA a few years ago and TSA staff were the most gratuitously rude people I've met in airports in my life. Complete brain dead losers.

LHR security is just as bad IME

Indeed, Heathrow security is the rudest I have experienced. They get aggressive if you so much as ask a question. Furthermore, I have on numerous occasions had them argue with me to go against the medical advice from both doctors and medical advice manufacturers. Last time going as far as claiming that a scanner does not emit electromagnetic radiation.

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#105

Post by wat10000 »

MostlyStable wrote: post #21
RHSeeger wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do know there was airport security before the TSA took over, right?

While I agree that TSA should be done away with, I'm afraid that it wouldn't actually change what airport security looks like in most places. At this point, since people have gotten used to it, my guess is that if Airports took over their own security again (or went back to however it worked pre-TSA), they would maintain about the same standards and procedures in an effort to avoid blame in the case that something ha…

The actual screening would probably be the same. But the customer service side of it might improve when airports can compete on how nice the experience is. I don't imagine these scanners are ever going away, but loudly clueless workers don't have to be part of the experience.

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#106

Post by Kwpolska »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #80
ribosometronome wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The plantiff was coerced through the scanner by immensely incorrectly trained TSA operators. Had she done as you suggested, ignored the agents orders, and just walked through security she surely would have been, at least, trespassed if not outright detained, fined, and worse.

I never suggested she walk through security.

What do you suggest then? Not flying? The TSA had refused her request for a pat-down.

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#107

Post by to11mtm »

bluGill wrote: post #65
ssl-3 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't intend for this to sound like an excuse. I don't fly often, and almost never with anything expensive. But I am curious: Can objects like expensive precision optics be insured against damage from the TSA? Is that a thing that regular people can easily find coverage for?

Your house insurance will generally cover it. However they then mark you as a increased risk for claims and so your rates go up. Thus it probably isn't worth making a claim for something that is "only" a few thousand dollars. Insurance is a great idea for rare things so expensive that you couldn't handle the loss on your own, but for smaller value losses self-insure is likely a better idea in the long run. Of course…

Depends on the numbers/specifics. Some homeowners policies may exclude high dollar items or limit the coverage to items in the premises (i.e. if it was stolen off the shelf in the house, that could be covered, but not necessarily other scenarios.)

A specific policy can still be cheap however; mine comes in at about 311$ of replacement value per dollar of premium a month, if you're traveling a lot or shooting at places where stuff can come up missing it's not the worst peace of mind.

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#108

Post by readthenotes1 »

gensym wrote: post #73
idle_zealot wrote: post #58

There's no consistency in procedure from TSA agents. They're undertrained, unaccountable, and some combination of bored, disinterested, and high on petty authority. I don't think any amount of training or official guidance could improve the situation, though. The essential problem is the authority plus unaccountability or oversight. That will always go poorly for anyone subjected to that authority sooner or later.

Perhaps once AI destroys all the livelihoods of educated and disciplined white collar workers, it'll be easier for the TSA to find people who can follow basic instructions and show a normal amount of empathy.

And then the job will drive that empathy right out of them.

Re: TSA leaves passenger needing surgery after illegally forcing her through scanner

#109

Post by QuercusMax »

mikestew wrote: post #62
kube-system wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airlines could have locked cockpit doors and prohibited passengers from bringing box cutters on their airplanes 30 years ago, but they didn't, even though hijackings regularly happened. When there is no coordination between airlines, none of them wants to be the one who implements tough security and pisses off their customer base.

…even though hijackings regularly happened Maybe in the 70s, but that pretty much stopped with advent of metal detectors. And the hijackers had guns , not knives. Before 9/11 I carried a pocket knife on every flight I took. Regardless, they’re doing it now , so I fail to see your point.

Before 9/11, my dad and I used to carry our fishing tackle boxes onto the plane because we didn't trust them to go through baggage handling. One time my dad brought a 10-inch fish gutting knife on a flight and didn't realize it until we got to our destination. Sailed right through the metal detectors and x-ray machines.
Post reply on HN