Slashdot Mirror


TSA Defends Pat Down of 4-Year-Old Girl

cosm writes "With public outcry against the TSA continuing to spread, the TSA is defending a recent episode in which a four-year-old was patted down while kicking and screaming at Wichita Airport in Kansas. From the AP article: 'The grandmother of a 4-year-old girl who became hysterical during a security screening at a Kansas airport said Wednesday that the child was forced to undergo a pat-down after hugging her, with security agents yelling and calling the crying girl an uncooperative suspect.'"

10 of 1,174 comments (clear)

  1. Re:... because terrorrists don't have children. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You should RTFA which you clearly didn't.

    It's not a case of never screening children. The child had passed the metal detector once, but after that she had contact with her grandmother who hadn't been screened yet, so she had to be screened again. For some reason just sending her through the metal detector again wasn't enough, which makes no sense as it was clearly good enough the first time.

  2. Re:They called her an :uncooperative subject" by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Informative

    There are several, unfortunately none of them belong either of the 2 parties that the media have deemed worthy of the office. So you'll never hear about them.

  3. They're batting a 1000... by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
  4. Re:They called her an :uncooperative subject" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's called poor training. It simply isn't easy to access children, every medical student learns this. For example, to examine a young child's ears, nose and throat (especially the throat) you have to make use of the mother / caregiver and either a battalion of nurses to hold the blanket wrapped child down or clever psychology. Only occasionally you'll lucky enough to find a co-operative 4 yo with the right temperament who will open her mouth for you and allow you to depress her tongue with a depressor. These cops simply do not have correct training. One does not consider a child a suspect, nor does one forcibly grope a child or expect the child to co-operate or expect the grandmother to be able to magically calm a child down after threats of airport closure.

  5. Re:They called her an :uncooperative subject" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    There are several, unfortunately none of them are among those that the media have deemed worthy of the office. So you'll never hear about them.

    FTFY

    Ron Paul 2012!!!

  6. Re:Of course. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seriously, we'd see the true colors of this nation and the control the politicians and corporate overlords really hold if someone went berserk at a checkpoint trying to protect their child.

    Perhaps. My sister completely flipped out years ago, when the TSA basically released her 2-year-old into the crowded airport (she was at the "terrible twos" stage) while they held my sister and brother-in-law back because the metal detector had beeped. They literally took away the child from her parents, and then paid no attention when she bolted into the crowd.

    My sister was hauled off for "special screening", cursing them at the top of her lungs in english and french, in a pluperfect rage, because she tried to defy the TSA and catch my niece. My brother-in-law kept his head, kowtowed obsequiously to the tinpot tyrants, and was allowed through once they'd figured out what forgotten bit of metal was causing the beeping. By the time he found his daughter, half an hour later, they'd finished ritually humiliating my sister (she's an American citizen, so she got the short course) and they managed to make their plane with a minute or two to spare.

    During all of this, literally hundreds of people stood by watching and did nothing. So I guess we did see the "true colors of this nation" as you said. It's the color of terrorized weaklings.

  7. Re:They called her an :uncooperative subject" by ZeroSumHappiness · · Score: 5, Informative

    Vote Ron Paul!

    Ron Paul wants to demolish the TSA.

  8. Re:Of course. by tilante · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's the thing: No one's saying small children should be excluded from screening. What they're saying is that a screaming, panicked child should be handled with care and gentleness. There's no reason for adult security officers to be yelling at a four-year-old child. It's not going to help the situation, whether the child is doing anything wrong or not. Since you apparently didn't read the article in full: The adult *had* gone through security, and had set off the metal detector. The adult had been put aside for a pat-down screening. The child ran over and hugged the adult. The family's suggestion was that since the attempts to pat down the child were distressing her, the agents have the child go through the metal detector again, or use a wand to check her for metal objects. The TSA agents insisted on a pat-down. Further, they wanted to take the distressed child to another room, away from and out of sight of all of the adults who were with her, and search her there. This distressed the child further. From what we're given in the story, the adults with the child were behaving reasonably. They suggested alternatives to patting down the child, since that was distressing her. They were willing to have the child be patted down, but they were not willing to have the TSA agents take her out of their sight to search her. A fair amount of the traveling public are children, and many children do get upset easily. The TSA should be training their staff on dealing properly with upset children.

  9. Re:Exactly! I was saying that too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It would go a long way toward ensuring a safer, happier humanity instead of this "Well I carry a gun everywhere because it's better me than him." Are you fucking retarded? Try understanding why someone might flip out and start shooting up a post office, for instance.

    Actually, you'd find it surprising how few crimes are committed by people who are carrying firearms legally. The criminals don't bother to jump through the hoops of registering, training, getting a license, etc. You'd find it even more surprising how many crimes are prevented by armed citizens.

    Not to mention the supreme court has explicitly ruled that it is not the responsibility of the police to protect you.

  10. Re:Of course. by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Informative

    I submit to the record, exhibit A:

    TSA screeners at LAX arrested on narcotics trafficking charges

    CNN front page right now...it'd almost be funny if it wasn't so fucking sad and infuriating.