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?"
Unless I'm mistaken, you don't have rights anymore. If the TSA thinks you're a terrorist based on your evasiveness and defiance they can detain you indefinitely.
If the answer to either of those questions is "No", then you better do what they tell you.
Sure, they're violating your rights. But in the United States, you have no recourse except to go to court. Which will costs LOTS of money. More than you have, probably. And don't forget that the cops and TSA will make your life hell while the case slowly progresses.
This country is so fucked.
... Dress sharply at all times, and keep a business-like posture and demeanour. Playing bully with a peon is safe enough, but harassing an (apparently) wealthy and influent person is a career-destroying move. You don't mess with the Ruling Elite, so might as well camouflage as one.
Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
You know where they have lawyers and actually might know more than the random crap you'll get here.
Pussy.
Everyone needs to stand up for their civil rights, or no will have any civil rights anymore. The TSA thinks they're above the law, above the Bill of Rights, and they have to be proven wrong. That, and the TSA needs to be dismantled. If they're "expanding" into non-airport-related areas (train stations, bus stations, docks), how long does anyone think it'll be before they start performing traffic stops at random and committing search-and-seizure without a warrant "because they thought you acted/looked/smelled like a terrorist"?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
I thought the US was turning into a police state, but I didn't realize the TSA gestapo were wandering the subways and accosting people at random.
I weep for the America that once was.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Edmund Burke said all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
"I do not consent to a search."
"Why are you detaining "Why are you detaining me?"
"Am I under arrest?"
"Am I free to go?"
that first one is really important and may be overlooked due to hiding in the subject line (I do not understand the tendency of people here to start typing in the subject and then continue in the body)
An officer may not have made an arrest, but the officer still has a right to detain you. Law classes are worth the money - even undergraduate ones. In fact, there should be civil rights classes in these universities. Of course, perhaps they won't like the outcome of students educated in the law....
To fight the TSA requires any number of resources in your favor: time, money, influence, or numbers.
Perhaps the easiest way to fight this particular group is by pulling a SEP -> someone else's problem. Attend a city council meeting, and move that the local Boston Police Department have its budget slashed, reasoning that since the TSA is doing their job, the city no longer needs to pay for benefits that the Boston PD is not providing. 3 possibilities are likely -> 1.) the city council will squash the movement (but doing so will draw attention to your plight, and paint the current politicians as being in bed with the TSA -> not a good place to be when the TSA is chafing potential voters), 2.) the city will cut Boston PD's budget (at which point the Boston PD will have to make a tough choice of pissing off the populace because of a pay cut, or letting it slide), or 3.) the Boston PD will become wise to the situation, and take out a jurisdictional grievance against the TSA (they get to keep their budget, remove some competition, and look like the heroes -> kid gloves from the officers reassigned to the public transit beat, something of a junket for the officers concerned as it may be 'easy' compared to other patrols).
This is how you handle problems that you do not have the resources to fight properly -> get someone who has the proper resources to do the fighting for you. It helps if you appeal to this person's / group's best interest in a truthful, sincere way (the untruthful / insincere stuff tends to fall apart before a victory).
And yes, given the Amtrak PD's response to various TSA shenanigans, it has a precedent. And the danger to the Boston PD (or whoever patrolled that beat prior to the TSA) is quite real; you don't want a generation of Bostonians growing up thinking that it takes a guy in tactical gear with a SMG to keep public transportation safe; once they do, the original patrollers will never get that beat back (loss of territory),
I am John Hurt.
There's no point in asking what rights you have, because you have none. You can't even photograph public buildings with that iPhone, much less prevent a goon too dumb to get a job as a mall security guard from seizing it, no matter how much or how loudly you protest. And if you cause enough stink, the TSA meatheads will get an actual cop to come over and give you grief. If they want to badly enough, they can now, thanks to President Obama, detain you indefinitely if they so choose. Even confessing to whatever they think you might well do at some point in the future may not get your released. You won't be allowed to talk to anyone about it, either -- not even a lawyer. And even when (if) you are let go, don't talk about it or they can jug your once again.
For those not counting, the Federal government has in this one encounter wiped its collective ass with the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and (probably) 9th Amendments, as well as pissing on the grave of habeas corpus.
Have a nice day.
-B
Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.
Edmund Burke said all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Yeah but fighting back against police or TSA agents isn't the thing that needs done. The thing to do is to convince our Congressmen that we actually care about civil rights more than protection from terrorists. Fight the stupid laws not the people paid to enforce them
Is there a difference anymore? Do they have enforcement authority? Half of the regulators have some sort of enforcement authority that they self-authorized in the federal register. Don't cooperate, let them do whatever they're going to do, and when they don't find anything, sue for false imprisonment. There is an ambulance chaser somewhere interested in making a buck...
Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability: without Availability the other two are assured, as is Bankruptcy.
I'd rather my son know that I died for a reason than teach him to be a slave coward.
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
Find a lawyer. Get a suggestion from that lawyer. Reach an agreement with that lawyer to represent you should you be arrested during such a stop. (This will probably involve putting money into an escrow account equal to the charge of a few hours of his time - also called a "retainer".)
Research your local laws regarding police stops. (Also called "Terry stops".) In some states, you are under ZERO obligation to do anything unless they are explicitly detaining you, and in those locations, the simple first response is "Am I being detained or am I free to go?" If they say you are being detained, the second response would be "On suspicion of the violation of what law am I being detained?" The third response is "I will not consent to any searches, and will not answer any questions until I have an attorney present." Then you call the lawyer mentioned above. You go to booking, you get searched anyway, you answer *NO* questions that are asked.
Take direct legal advice given by random strangers on the internet with a grain of salt.
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
Vote for Ron Paul. End the TSA
You assume your elected officials care what people want.
In the 1970s I used to hear stories like that from the Soviet-union and their friends.
Eastern-Europe immigrants who lived in the communist time might have experience in these matters ask them how best to avoid random searches.
The best part of your linked article:
"There are notices posted at the entrance to the station that the inspection is in progress."
Terrorist in Boston: "Well, I guess we should bring our bombs to Downtown Crossing instead of Park St!"
I mean, the way they're doing this, they're absolutely guaranteeing they won't actually catch a reasonably non-stupid terrorist.
I am officially gone from
Dude, it's security theatre at it's best! Clearly they want the terrorists to bring popcorn instead of bombs.
The problem is based on the US legal system the way to challenge the Constitutionality of these laws is to break them, and then (after a likely horrible reaming by the justice system) appeal to the Supreme court to try to get it overturned.
Unless someone stands up to the violation of their civil rights, these things never get tested. Relying on the useless Congress that passed the law in the first place to overturn it is pretty much futile.
. I agree that outright fighting isn't the answer but begging isn't going to work either. I'd suggest impeachments
You really think you can get anyone impeached? Unless they are busted in a FBI corruption sting, I'd say your chances are about zero.
The reason why we are stuck with these idiots and petty tyrants leading us is because 70% of the population just doesn't give a fuck. They want their SUVs and big screen cable TV, and they don't give a damn if somebody passes a law that allows indefinite detention of 'Terrorists'.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Americans have lived through civil war, economic collapse, a surprise military attack on U.S. territory, dictators and world war on two fronts, and, for 50 years, the threat of nuclear Armageddon. Through all these threats, we mostly stayed true to our values and preserved our freedom. And when we didn’t, it didn’t make us safer and we always came to regret it.
The thing to do is to convince our Congressmen
those 'congressmen' do not give zit about what you think. so you cant 'convince' them either. they have been elected there by the monetary backing of private interest groups who are much richer than rest 95% of the population. only they have their ear.
you have 2 choices at this juncture :
- be richer than 5% or so of the population, that controls 72% of the wealth. (in contrast you have only 15% - so its impossible - there would be enough who made it that much up till this point if it would work)
- get rid of the economic system that allows tiny minority of population to command 70-80% of economic wealth.
- get rid of the current existing political system, in which only those who are extremely rich or have the backing of extremely rich can get elected.
Read radical news here
no need to get into trouble
No kidding, the person posting the question seems to have his tinfoil wrapped too tightly. He has a laptop and a smartphone, like that is not an ordinary every day occurrence that draws no interest, except possibly from thieves. The roving teams most likely just want to look in his bag/pack. Nothing looks ilke a block of C4 with a detonator attached, thank you have a nice day.
You completely miss the point. The fourth amendment to the US Constitution guarantees that
The right of the people to be secure in their persons...and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. [emphasis mine]
Warrantless street searches clearly violate the spirit and letter of the law.
What about public safety you ask? According to the US government, four times as many people die from lightning strikes every year than from terrorist activities.
By your logic, we should cover the country with a non-conductive dome.
Nature can't be controlled you say? Okay, how about this: the US government estimated that 730 US persons died as a result of terrorism. in 2007
They also report 17,100 murders in the US during the same year.
I suspect you'd be hard pressed to find a lot of people who think that we should give up our Fourth amendment protections to stop all the murders. Why then, should we give them up to "fight terrorism."
In any case, I suggest you either grow a brain or stop trolling. Pretty please?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
[citation needed]
Agreed, contacting your elected representatives is the only reasonable way to achieve meaningful change.
Just like the people did in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain.
Not likely. I despised "W" giving the okey-dokey to invade the persons and privacy of people in the US then and feel betrayed that our current President has done nothing to fix the problem.
Terrorist: Look at that! 600 people waiting in the security check point line at LAX!!! More than they can fit on any plane!!!
Terrorist: *BOOM*
CNN: 100s dead, 100s wounded in LAX bombing.
See the problem?
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Civil liberties know no "right" or "left". It's one of the few common causes we have left.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
We are chafing at it and railing against it. OWS is a liberal movement. That said, we are at a bit of a loss when the Republicans are evil, the Democrats are evil, and no one else is standing up.
The best part of your linked article:
"There are notices posted at the entrance to the station that the inspection is in progress."
Terrorist in Boston: "Well, I guess we should bring our bombs to Downtown Crossing instead of Park St!"
I mean, the way they're doing this, they're absolutely guaranteeing they won't actually catch a reasonably non-stupid terrorist.
Our government would not pat people down for safety. They are patting people down to scare them and make them feel powerless. They are reinforcing the fact that we do not have rights or control over the situation. The only reason our government would want us to think that they are protecting us is to avoid future liability when something actually does go wrong. That way, they can say "look, look, we were trying to prevent this all along..." Even if they are full of crap.
The same thing Obama did about Gitmo. Issue an executive order, get stonewalled by Congress, realize that being president isn't like being king, and give up.
Brazilian electricians need to be very careful.
Yeah every time i'm at an airport security checkpoint surrounded by hundreds of people waiting in line to check their shoes I get a good laugh thinking how perfect a target the checkpoint line makes. You can shove a lot of explosives into a carry on bag when you know it'll never be checked because your target is the line of people waiting to be checkedd...
I wonder what they'll do besides mandating clear luggage or banning carry on items all together.
They're called "Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response" teams? Seriously? That has got to be a backronym.
"OK, so we put these teams together. What do we call them?"
"I dunno. Should probably be something that sounds all scary and badass. You know, to scare the bad guys when they hear you're coming."
"Snakes are badass. How about COBRA teams? Cobras are scary."
"Nah, that sounds like a GI Joe episode. I like the general idea though."
"OK then, how about VIPER teams?"
"Ooh, that's good. VIPER. I like it."
"Great. Now we just need to figure out what the hell VIPER stands for."
"I can't think of a word for the E either. Screw it, we'll just leave it out. VIPR teams. Same difference."
Read my blog.
How about Free Speech Zones?
They put you in a chain link fence box a couple of miles away from whatever it is you happen to be protesting, so politicians don't see anything that might upset them.
Got news for ya. We're in the declining days of our Republic. A lot of the great ideas the founding fathers had at the beginning are pretty much gone now.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
No. Because it isn't the citizens in the airport they're protecting, and if you thought it was, you've been had.
First, they are protecting the aircraft, which represents millions of dollars as well as a portion of the transport infrastructure. Second, they are protecting anything on the ground (such as the world trade center) which might be damaged in a very costly way if a heavy aircraft plowed into it at high speed.
You, they don't give a flying fuck about. That's over. Any remarks to the contrary are propaganda, nothing else. All you need to do is look at what they've done to your rights. Even a cursory look will come to the conclusion that you now have none that aren't more than a temporary illusion maintained for no other reason than to keep you calm until the time comes when you get in the way, at which point you will be brushed aside like the fly you are to them.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Security checkpoints aren't to protect normal people. They're to protect the pentagon, white house and financial centers from having planes dropped on them.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial