and I'm going to have you arrested." situation, I remembered reading about the run-in Penn Gillette had with the TSA people and managed to find it.
...A security guy came over. I assumed the position. I had a button up shirt on that was untucked. He reached around while he was behind me and grabbed around my front pocket. I guess he was going for my flashlight, but the area could have loosely been called "crotch." I said, "You have to ask me before you touch me or it's assault."
He said, "Once you cross that line, I can do whatever I want."
I said that wasn't true. I say that I have the option of saying no and not flying. He said, "Are you going to let me search you, or do I just throw you out?"
I said, "Finish up, and then call the police please."
When he was finished with my shoes, he said, "Okay, you can go."
I said, "I'd like to see your supervisor and I'd like LVPD to come here as well. I was assaulted by you."
He said, "You're free to go, there's no problem."
I said, "I have a problem, please send someone over."
That is an idea; they fondle something you think they shouldn't, demand a police officer so you can have them arrested. Would make things interesting., since the TSA weenies have apparently been trying to make the molestations as offensive as they can get by with:
I asked him if he was looking forward to conducting the full-on pat-downs. "Nobody's going to do it," he said, "once they find out that we're going to do."
In other words, people, when faced with a choice, will inevitably choose the Dick-Measuring Device over molestation? "That's what we're hoping for. We're trying to get everyone into the machine." He called over a colleague. "Tell him what you call the back-scatter," he said. "The Dick-Measuring Device," I said. "That's the truth," the other officer responded.
The pat-down at BWI was fairly vigorous, by the usual tame standards of the TSA, but it was nothing like the one I received the next day at T.F. Green in Providence. Apparently, I was the very first passenger to ask to opt-out of back-scatter imaging. Several TSA officers heard me choose the pat-down, and they reacted in a way meant to make the ordinary passenger feel very badly about his decision. One officer said to a colleague who was obviously going to be assigned to me, "Get new gloves, man, you're going to need them where you're going."
...
The second lesson is that the effectiveness of pat-downs does not matter very much, because the obvious goal of the TSA is to make the pat-down embarrassing enough for the average passenger that the vast majority of people will choose high-tech humiliation over the low-tech ball check.
You know, I'm really surprised some parent hasn't already decked one of these clowns for handling their kid; wouldn't that be one hell of a news story and court case?
Update: the thugs really don't like it when anyone says 'No', do they?
4 comments:
Demand a police officer?
Hell, call the airport resident cops yourself, if you really want to go there.
Or the County Sheriff.
Problem with "demanding" they call a cop is that you can't really make them do it.
The latest news stories are why I'm no longer going to fly. I found out that if I travel for business, they either have to rent me a car or pay mileage on mine. Driving a rental is far cheaper than air travel and mileage on my car means they don't have to rent a car. To hell with the TSA and the airlines.
There is a deep irony in our dear leaders making flying so unpleasant for the sake of "safety" when driving the same distance comes with around twice the risk of fatal and many times the risk of serious injuries (when things go that wrong with a plane, it tends to kill more than it hurts).
Rail is safer than flying with regard to fatalities, but you have a hell of a lot greater chance of getting assaulted on the train and mugged or worse at the station and its surrounds.
Wait'll the sheep come back from the Thanksgiving holidays; I 'spect there will be more then a few incidents that congress critters(and the intarweb) hear about.
Post a Comment