Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: What's the Best Way To Deal With Roving TSA Teams?
An anonymous reader writes "I live in Boston, and I have noticed the TSA performs random security checks at the Copley T (subway station) and other locations. I routinely travel with a laptop, iPhone, and other gadgetry. What are my rights when asked by one of the TSA agents to 'come over here'? Can I say no and proceed with my private business? What if a police officer says that I 'must go over there and cooperate'? Can I decline or ask for a warrant? Like the majority of the population, I turn into an absolute shrinking violet when pressured by intimidating authority, but I struggle with what I see to be blatant social devolution. Has anybody out there actually responded rationally, without complying? What were your experiences?"
http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty/tsa-seeks-expand-airport-experience-everyday-life
And
http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/know-your-rights-when-traveling
While it might not be exactly your situation, you can probably find 90% of what you need from the EFF. If you need more specific information, you will probably need to ask real counsel.
Start here: http://www.flexyourrights.org/
Trusting software vendors is no smarter than trus
"Why are you detaining me?"
"Am I under arrest?"
"Am I free to go?"
When it comes to police in most civilized societies, you get to have a very simple dialogue. You can say: "I refuse to volunteer for any such [delay]; but if you order me to do so, I will comply with any order you give."
If you don't volunteer, and you make that an official statement, then the officer needs to decide to make it an order. They aren't allowed to give illegal orders. If they do, you still must comply with it at the time, and without hesitation, but you can fight that later in court.
Basically, it puts everyone on the their best behaviour. If you aren't happy with what winds up happening, and you later discover that they weren't permitted to do so, then you can easily fight it after the fact.
Just remember two things: a) police are allowed to trick you into volunteering, or even kind of volunteering. So make sure you hear the word "order". b) police can be nice and legal, nice and illegal, or mean and legal. Be sure you know what you're risking.
"A passenger may choose not to be inspected but then is prohibited from riding on the MBTA."
What rights are being violated exactly?
We can start with the 4th Amendment and go from there.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
It should be noted that the officers checking bags at MBTA stations in Boston are NOT TSA agents, but officers of the MBTA Transit Police. They are performing similar work, but are police officers. Your choice here is to comply with the search, or state that you will not comply, and walk three blocks down to the next T station.
"Your" Congressmen?
Commence laughter now.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
http://www.newschannel5.com/story/15725035/officials-claim-tennessee-becomes-first-state-to-deploy-vipr-statewide
Actually it is in the Constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law
The Founders weren't stupid.
Once you've consented to a search you've lost control of your property. And you sure as hell don't want someone with an agenda or a desire for a quick promotion putting stuff in your bags.
There's been more than one case of airport security putting drugs in passenger bags for test purposes, losing track of it, and those people passing through countries with zero tolerance. You're pretty much screwed then. I believe the fellow that spent two years in prison made it on to Slashdot at some point.
"The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.
"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to move from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the 14th amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." Schactman v. Dulles, 96 App DC 287, 293.
These two cases were in the 1950's, but Supreme Court case law on this goes back to at least 1823.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
FYI, I think this is the U.S. Law that authorizes TSA VIPR teams which I'm assuming the TSA teams in Boston are. This law ran through 2011 though I think it was extended in the 2012 TSA budget:
TITLE 6 > CHAPTER 4 > SUBCHAPTER II
 1112. AUTHORIZATION OF VISIBLE INTERMODAL PREVENTION AND RESPONSE TEAMS
(a) In general The Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration, may develop Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (referred to in this section as âoeVIPRâ) teams to augment the security of any mode of transportation at any location within the United States. In forming a VIPR team, the Secretaryâ"
(1) may use any asset of the Department, including Federal air marshals, surface transportation security inspectors, canine detection teams, and advanced screening technology;
(2) may determine when a VIPR team shall be deployed, as well as the duration of the deployment;
(3) shall, prior to and during the deployment, consult with local security and law enforcement officials in the jurisdiction where the VIPR team is or will be deployed, to develop and agree upon the appropriate operational protocols and provide relevant information about the mission of the VIPR team, as appropriate; and
(4) shall, prior to and during the deployment, consult with all transportation entities directly affected by the deployment of a VIPR team, as appropriate, including railroad carriers, air carriers, airport owners, over-the-road bus operators and terminal owners and operators, motor carriers, public transportation agencies, owners or operators of highways, port operators and facility owners, vessel owners and operators and pipeline operators.
(b) Authorization of appropriations
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section such sums as necessary for fiscal years 2007 through 2011.
@de_machina
I'm a Democrat and I'll tell you, I actually kind of like Ron Paul. If we lose, but lose to him, I wouldn't be too sad. Wouldn't have minded McCain too much either until he picked Sarah Palin as his VP pick. The only real problem I have with the GOP are the Christian fundies that seem to get traction there. They gotta go. Palin, Santorum, Bachmann - not on my watch. That's what makes me a Democrat. But yeah I agree, Paul is pretty cool.
But unfortunately I kind of agree with George Carlin on this one. Shuffling around these politicians every couple of years doesn't do much. The real power is in the corporations. They buy the politicians (oops I meant "lobby") and get their way every single time. We erode the Bill of Rights and nobody bats an eye at it. We can now indefinitely imprison anyone that might be a terrorist. So there goes Habeas Corpus. First amendment is shot to hell. What do you think the founding fathers would think of "free speech zones"? I have a feeling they'd be loading muskets. Second amendment? Also boned. Nagin after Katrina went through the gun licenses and ordered the national guard to confiscate every gun in the city. And they did. It goes on and on. Warantless wiretaps, GPS tracking devices without a court order, Carnivore...you no longer have hardly any rights at all, but you don't even notice it. They really did a number on us. A real pro job.
I hope you're right, that things will be better. But I doubt they ever will be. I think lobbyists and lawyers and greedy assholes and lazy cops have already pretty much doomed us.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
If the Democrats you support are Kucinich, Sanders, and Franken, then I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you're pretty far to the left. And Paul is going to be one of the worst picks you can make.
He's a complete nutjob. He's opposed to practically every single government agency, including the Dept of Education, EPA, NIH, and the Social Security Administration. He's a racist who opposes the Civil Rights Act and has a pretty devoted following of neo-Nazis and white supremacists. He's against consumer legislation. He wants to go back to the gold standard. He also compared Social Security and Medicare to slavery. WTF?
He's an obstetrician/gynecologist who opposes abortion. That doesn't even make sense. He claims to be a libertarian, yet wants to prevent women from getting abortions? He wouldn't care for a patient who couldn't afford his services (and he pretty much said this in an earlier debate on TV). His son is an ophthalmologist who decided to quit the national opthalmology licensing board to start his own.
Look, I don't like Obama at all. But Ron Paul (and his son) are crazy as shit and I sure as hell won't vote for him.