I experienced the enhanced patdown myself, at DCA, on Tuesday. It was invasive, but not as bad as these stories.

Here’s the thing: I have a zero-tolerance policy for physical violation — hell, shaking hands can be an ordeal for me — so rationalizing something as “invasive but not bad” makes no sense whatsoever. The more I see people justifying a certain amount of physical assault (how much?) for a certain amount of security (how much?), the more hopeless I feel about our chances as a society. Put aside for a moment how the TSA’s policies came to be. Why are people so willing to accept being groped by so-called security experts making $13 dollars an hour? Are they so afraid? Will they not do the research for themselves? Do they know the odds of dying in a terrorist attack — 1 in 30 million — is roughly equivalent to the odds of contracting fatal skin cancer from just one trip through a backscatter device? (And cancer is hardly the only side effect of radiation.)

This is a human rights issue. Schneier describes airport security zones as “extra-Constitutional areas,” but the ACLU, for one, has already taken the TSA (and the DHS) to court for violations of Constitutional rights. This is hardly a shut case, which is why we must continue to resist the TSA’s “extra-Constitutional” policies by any means.

In the meantime, for me personally there is no amount of physical invasion that is tolerable, no matter how irrational our fear of explosives-wearing boogeymen.

PS: I know it’s somewhat misguided for me to lay so much blame on the populace. As is usual in these matters, the other half of the truth behind this debacle lies behind the old question: who benefits? Follow the money and you’ll find the usual politicians enriching themselves on lobbyist snacks. We should direct our outrage accordingly.

» Share on Facebook

[The TSA Supervisor on duty] grabbed the baggie as it came out of the X-ray and asked if it was mine. After responding yes, he pointed at my comment and demanded to know “What is this supposed to mean?” “It could [mean] a lot of things, it happens to be an opinion on mine.” “You can’t write things like this,” he said. “You mean my First Amendment right to freedom of speech doesn’t apply here?” “Out there (pointing pass the id checkers) not while in here (pointing down),” was his response.
(via flyertalk.com)

Facing public scrutiny, TSA spokeswoman Yolanda Clark later backpedaled, saying that Bird was free to express his opinion, that writing on bags is not prohibited. “The passenger was never detained by TSA,” she explained. “Local law enforcement briefly interviewed him and determined he had not broken any laws, and he was allowed to fly.”

BoingBoing’s own Cory Doctorow describes his experience with arbitrary seizure of property:

I flew from SFO to LAX yesterday morning, and was robbed at gunpoint by a TSA agent, who stole my cologne, face-wash, and moisturizer. She said that my moisture baggie could only contain vessels of 3 oz or less’ worth of moisture. I pointed out that all these vessels did have less than 3 oz’ worth of moist substances in them, as they were all half-empty, and she said yes, but the vessels were capable of holding more than 3 oz.
(via BoingBoing)

I feel safer already. Don’t you?

(via BoingBoing)

» Share on Facebook