Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TSA Orders Searches of Valet Parked Car At Airport

Posted by Soulskill on from the one-step-forward,-one-step-back dept.

schwit1 writes "Laurie Iacuzza walked to her waiting car at the Greater Rochester International Airport after returning from a trip and that's when she found it — a notice saying her car was inspected after she left for her flight. She said, 'I was furious. They never mentioned it to me when I booked the valet or when I picked up the car or when I dropped it off.' Iacuzza's car was inspected by valet attendants on orders from the TSA."

42 of 453 comments (clear)

  1. And the story is...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Valet parked cars may remain in front of the busy area of the airport for a while before being parked.

    Already-parked cars aren't near the airport.

    If you're going to park a car full of explosives, you can either create a small crater in a car park, or you will go for the airport - so cars that are left outside are checked.

    Yes, people who are parking the cars should be informed beforehand. That way they can choose to park themselves and make their own way to the terminal building if they don't want their car searched.

    1. Re:And the story is...? by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is when they damage your car they will deny it and you will get nothing.

      If they don't just steal everything inside the car as well.

    2. Re:And the story is...? by noh8rz9 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      the AC's analogy fials because you could just as easily do such an act with just stopping yoru car at the airport. this whole thing is very violating because wehn you use a valet you trust that they won't mess with your stuff. if they can't do that the whole valet thing goes away. i disagree with harrier and that the problem isn't when they damage it, the damage is the breach of trust.

      --
      let's have a conversation! let me know what you think.
    3. Re:And the story is...? by LouTheTroll · · Score: 5, Informative

      Living in Rochester, I actually caught this on a local news station and there was a lot more information. The concern (and perhaps the story) isn't so much the searching (as their rational is that those vehicles are often parked at the entrance and exit lanes blah blah blah) but that the searching is being done by the valets instead of TSA or law enforcement. These individuals (at the moment) are not trained and have no oversight. So when the thefts and such start occurring, you have zero recourse and absolutely no hope of resolution. The point being that we have can assume some level of trust with TSA and law enforcement as they have oversight and procedures to reduce these type of theft events but there's nothing in place with this valet program in Rochester atm. (And please don't flame me about assume a level of trust with the TSA and law enforcement, I'm just trying to provide more information and some context.)

    4. Re:And the story is...? by bickerdyke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And that's different from what happens to you luggage in WHAT way ??

      May I remind you that you are not allowed to use locks that are not easy to open (read. useless) on your suitcase?

      --
      bickerdyke
    5. Re:And the story is...? by snookerdoodle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They can do that already. Without giving you notice. Without the TSA telling them to do anything.

      The news isn't that valets have access to your car. The news is that the TSA is having them search it.

    6. Re:And the story is...? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The story is ... that the current government is, in theory, authorized by the People, under certain conditions. One of those conditions is specified in the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution:

      The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, 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.

      The current group of people calling themselves that government (is it really?) has written some stuff down called the USAPATRIOT ACT which says that this condition is no longer relevant. "So, then," the logician asks, "what authorizes that government?" Mao says it's the willingness to aggressively shoot people in the head, which decent people decline to do.

      This may all be for the best, ultimately, though. Carlin's hyperbole has a sound basis. Most people today don't feel that they have to fight for their liberty - they think there's a system in place to protect it. As these things become more common, they may finally realize that it's all a rouse to fleece them of their property, while denying their modern hybrid serf/helot/slave status. Unfortunately, it's going to have to get much uglier before they come to that realization. It'll happen eventually and it won't be pretty. But hopefully, society takes the next step at that point and evolves a better replacement system.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    7. Re:And the story is...? by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is not much different. Though people do expect it to be, since they often leave last minute valuables locked in the trunk of their cars.

      You can actually prevent those sorts of thefts by use of a gun, not by pointing it at the TSA, but by checking a firearm. Lots of photographers do this to protect their equipment. You can just buy an old useless firearm for pennies at a gun show, weld it up to make it non-functional and then check it as a firearm and place your valuables in the same storage device.

      This is of course not going to work with international travel.

    8. Re:And the story is...? by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > And that's different from what happens to you luggage in WHAT way ??

      Your car isn't being packed into a pressurized metal cylinder that will be flying through the air with thousands of gallons of jet fuel and hundreds of people on board.

      There isn't even the pretense of a public safety issue with a car parked at the airport.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re:And the story is...? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Funny

      Living in Rochester, I actually caught this on a local news station and there was a lot more information. The concern... [is] that the searching is being done by the valets instead of TSA or law enforcement. These individuals (at the moment) are not trained and have no oversight.

      Wait, I thought you said the TSA wasn't doing the searches...

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    10. Re:And the story is...? by Imagix · · Score: 4, Insightful

      weld it up to make it non-functional

      Be careful what you advise... up in Canada this would actually make it _more_ illegal (oddly enough). By welding it so it is non-functional, that changes the class of firearm from Non-restricted (loosely: rifles) or Restricted (loosely: handguns) to Prohibited (it's now a replica firearm....). Be sure to consult appropriate legal advice before attempting this stunt.

    11. Re:And the story is...? by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Funny

      Which is why I advised against international travel.

      Also I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on slashdot, if you want legal counsel go pay your own bloodsucker. Before attempting this stunt besure to consult with your lawyer, the TSA, DHS, all local law enforcement, a Rabbi, a Priest and a duck.

    12. Re:And the story is...? by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 3, Informative

      They can do that already.

      Yes, they can. But if they access the locked compartments and I haven't given them permission, that's illegal.

      Capability and legality are not always interchangeable.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    13. Re:And the story is...? by RMingin · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hey, nobody's perfect! I have a link here somewhere...

      Ah, there we go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs

      --
      The preceding comment is my own, and in no way construes an opinon of the Emperor of Mankind.
    14. Re:And the story is...? by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      9-11 wasn't a car bomb. Why are we trying to stop every possible bad thing? We weren't doing this before 9-11.

      But for fun, how many car bombs have been detonated or even attempted to be detonated in the US at an airport valet parking lot? I'm guessing less than 2 and likely zero.

      Lets stop actual threats and not people just fishing for something to justify their jobs.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    15. Re:And the story is...? by Zirbert · · Score: 5, Informative

      in Canada this would actually make it _more_ illegal (oddly enough). By welding it so it is non-functional, that changes the class of firearm from Non-restricted (loosely: rifles) or Restricted (loosely: handguns) to Prohibited (it's now a replica firearm....). Be sure to consult appropriate legal advice before attempting this stunt.

      Under Canadian law, deactivated firearms (i.e., those welded up to be non-functional) are a separate legal category from replica firearms. Replica firearms are prohibited devices, deactivated firearms are chunks of metal with no legal status. They have very different legal consequences, despite being indistinguishable without close physical examination (which most police officers will not be trained or interested enough to do).

      This makes no sense whatsoever, but is how Canada's firearms laws actually work.

      Verification sources: Canada's Firearms Act and the Canadian Firearm's Program's call centre (1-800-731-4000 from Canada and the U.S.).

    16. Re:And the story is...? by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're going to park a car full of explosives, you can either create a small crater in a car park, or you will go for the airport - so cars that are left outside are checked.

      But the airports were rapidly remodeled after 9/11, and have since been built such that a car exploding in the drop off area would only be slightly more lethal than a car exploding in a parking lot. They street is not close to where people are congregated. Some people would be killed who were walking through the doors, but the same is true of the parking lot. The psychological effect is equivalent as well. "Terrorist attack at airport (parking lot)" is going to cause about as much panic among idiots as "Terrorist attack at airport (doors)." The fact that your chances of dying from someone texting and driving on the way TO the airport is many times higher than dying from a car bomb either way won't matter to most.

      TSA has meanwhile set up security to where there are gigantic lines of human bodies before security. A backpack bomb in the line before the nude-scanners is the security risk if there is one. Fortunately, the only ones dumber than TSA are the terrorists, and they don't seem to have figured this out. However, TSA has been creating the gigantic lines for over a decade. Eventually, even the terrorists are going to realize that a small bomb right before security is more likely to "succeed" than trying to gain control of the plane or detonate a car bomb.

      Again, this is still far less dangerous than the drive TO the airport, I'm just annoyed that a line I'm told to wait in "for my safety" does the exact opposite and is wasting an insane amount of tax dollars that could be going towards actual useful things. Such as research, lowering the debt, or really anything else the government spends money on.

    17. Re:And the story is...? by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't see why an airport should be a less secure zone than a plane.

      And yet, I and 19 of my "friends" could walk into 5 of the busiest airports in the country on the day before Thanksgiving, each carrying a backpack and two duffel bags filled with explosives and shrapnel, get in line and at a predetermined time, blow ourselves up while waiting in the crowded lines caused by the security circus.

      How many people do you think we could kill/maim in that event?

      Who would prevent me from doing this? They don't check people as they walk into the building. That certainly isn't very secure.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    18. Re:And the story is...? by pla · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you have never heard of car bombs, you should start watching international news.

      You can't hide a car bomb big enough to cause serious damage to anything outside the car. Successful attacks against structures have, without exception, used unmarked vans and dark-tinted SUVs for a reason.

      A valet, entirely without conducting a formal search, can instantly tell whether or not a car poses an explosive threat to the airport. The act of helping the passenger get their bags from the trunk and then driving the car to the long-term lot automatically rules out any plausible hiding spots for enough explosives to make it into a WMD or national security issue.

      Not to say, of course, that you couldn't fit enough somewhere in the body of the car to seriously damage the car itself, any occupants, and perhaps break a few windows of nearby cars - The Boston Marathon bombing proved roughly what you can do with a small well-placed bomb; but "Lot Z3" doesn't exactly equal the finish line of a marathon in terms of the number of squishy pink sacks of meat available for embedding shrapnel in.

    19. Re:And the story is...? by Zirbert · · Score: 4, Informative

      So you are telling me I can own and sell firearm look-a-likes in Canada, as long as they used to be functional, but are no longer.

      Yup. As long as it used to be capable of inflicting fatal injuries, it's fine. If it was always harmless, it's verboten.

      Welcome to Canada!

    20. Re:And the story is...? by Matt.Battey · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Anybody thought to wonder why the car was searched by the valet service instead of the the TSA itself?

      The very reason is because the contents of your car has long been held protected under the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution {Jay-Z even wrote a song about it, 99 Problems :) }. Where as, common law has set, the yet non-SCOTUS challenged precedent, that private security firms may check your baggage with x-rays and magnetometers (otherwise referred to as non-unreasonable means) when you enter the secured portion of an air-port, to protect the persons and private assets operated there. In no situation, has it ever been shown that the Government of the United States may search the person or materials or vehicle of every individual, unless entering or exiting the country (which falls under export law, under which you would be considered a "smuggler"). Because doing so assumes that there is a reasonable belief that every single person is some how operating in a criminal manner. (BTW: This is also why the NSA search warrants, if challenged would be shown to be invalid.)

    21. Re:And the story is...? by pla · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Want to know how I know you know jack shit about explosives?

      The same way I know you know jack shit about the real world, Mr. Military Demolitions Expert?


      They used vans and SUVs because of the shit crudeness of their fertilizer+diesel bombs.

      They used shitty crude fertilizer+diesel bombs because the average Joe can get fertilizer and diesel (and even then, if you don't run a local farm, good luck getting more than a few pounds of ammonium nitrate).


      I could take a Smart car packed with C-4 just inside of the frame/body and do way more damage.

      No doubt you could! And how, do you suppose, you would obtain that much C4 without raising every red flag in the intelligence community?


      Hey, if the TSA had exactly that information and searched the car based on reasonable suspicion, consider me on their side in this one. But we all know that didn't happen, they just found yet another way to abuse the interface between government and business to give a great big "fuck you" to our 4th amendment rights.

  2. The joys of private property ... by Builder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is the problem with more and more property being private and subject to conditions. On true public ground things like the 4th amendment matter. On private property, you're subject to the whims of the owners.

    1. Re:The joys of private property ... by Scareduck · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Nonsense. The problem here is using a third, private party to elide the Fourth Amendment.

      --

      Dog is my co-pilot.

    2. Re:The joys of private property ... by azadrozny · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If this becomes a precedent, can the police ask my house cleaner to execute a search warrant for my home?

    3. Re:The joys of private property ... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm sorry, but the court's ruling on that matter is classified.

  3. Outrageous by jason777 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This country is out of control. We have no more 4th amendment. Pretty soon the TSA will be expanding their highway searches from commercial trucks to every passenger car. Your freedom is gone. That being said, I would never trust my car to a valet. I park it myself. You are just asking for trouble otherwise.

    1. Re:Outrageous by AGMW · · Score: 5, Funny

      This country is out of control. My great x 3 grandparents left Germany during the rise of Bismarck. They came to the US. Where's to go now?

      Ironically, Germany!

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    2. Re:Outrageous by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which makes me want to point out that the last time I was in a German airport there was far less of this nonsense. I was even able to keep my shoes on.

  4. Didn't you notice who's doing the searching? by scotts13 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    According to the article, the valets themselves. Mot TSA agents, minimum wage, no-background-check valets. They're the last people to be in the car, and they decide where to park them. Anyone else see the two glaring problems here?

    1. Re:Didn't you notice who's doing the searching? by snookerdoodle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      BWAHAHA! Keystone Cops outsourcing their "job" to high school students.

      Come to think of it, the valets might be *more* qualified...

    2. Re:Didn't you notice who's doing the searching? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Funny

      Worst haiku I've seen in weeks.

  5. Reasonable Expectation of Privacy by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 4, Interesting
    FTA:

    We found out it happened to her because she valet parked her car. Those are the only cars that get inspected. So if security feels it is necessary to search some cars in the name of safety, why not search all of them?

    They'd probably like to be able to search any car that comes to the airport. Even so, I imagine they restrict searches to valet parked cars for two reasons: 1) they've the keys in hand and so it's easy; 2) more importantly, some lawyer probably told them that they could make the case in court that valet parked cars have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

  6. Terorists use Valet Parking? by Herder+Of+Code · · Score: 3, Funny

    Am I the only one who think it odd that the TSA is looking for terrorists that.. use Valet parking?

  7. Re:liability by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The valet is instructed to look in the trunk when they first get the car. So just set the bomb to detonate when the trunk is opened. That way you guarantee 1) you will be safely away from your bomb and 2) the car will be right where you want it to be when the bomb goes off

  8. I have an idea by slashmydots · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well if they're turning a valet parking invitation into a free inspection, there's also nothing stopping you from putting these 100dB contact-break alarms on basically everything including the trunk, glove compartment, etc. Let's see how mister TSA wanna-be likes his job when he gets 100 decibels in his face any time he touches anything but the steering wheel.

    I live in an apartment and it has one of those pathetically insecure chicken wire cages upstairs for additional storage. A $1 wire clipper and you can steal everyone's stuff so I put 4 of those contact break alarms under a cardboard box containing my stuff. Then I drew an arrow and "do not move or touch - pressure-sensitive alarm will sound" and that's the last thing anyone will steal. It'd work just as well for car searches except put the alarm on the inside so instead of a deterrent, it's a punishment of sorts.

  9. Why valet? by kilfarsnar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If I had a bomb or other nefarious contraband in my car and wanted to do harm at an airport, why the hell would I valet the car? This is one more example of TSA and other nation security state powers being used for infringing on the rights of people. I mean really...

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  10. Not the TSA by JelloJoe · · Score: 3, Informative

    The TSA is not involved in the Rochester airport. Little known fact, but airports are allowed to hire private security companies to do the passenger screening again as long as they follow TSA guidelines.

  11. TSA said it was not them by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 4, Informative

    of course, could be lying http://reason.com/blog/2013/07/18/it-wasnt-us-tsa-says-of-car-searches-at

  12. Ya well by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seems to be how weapons laws go. It is rare to find a country with gun laws that are entirely sensible. I think part of the reason is that when restrictions are enacted, they are often written by people who hate guns and thus know very little about them. They then never trouble themselves to consult with their military or the like to get some information. So, you get a silly law.

    1. Re:Ya well by ottothecow · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I suspect the point of this particular law is really a grandfather clause to allow people to keep things they already own (and encourage people to take firearms out of service), but ban the continued creation of replicas.

      If you have a deactivated souvenir rifle from your service in WWII, then it is no longer really treated as a firearm. It is a sentimental piece like a sculpture sitting on your mantle. Its hard to justify coming back to these people and making them get rid of their guns (which haven't been functional since 1945). People aren't out there producing deactivated weapons so the only way this stock would grow is if people go and deactivate current weapons (thus reducing the number out on the street).

      Replica weapons that look like real guns (and could be used to rob a store or get you shot by the cops when they see you playing with it) are inexpensive and much less likely to run into people who would be angered by losing them.

      --
      Bottles.
  13. Re:Valet Key by CelticWhisper · · Score: 4, Informative

    On my car (2008 Subaru Legacy 2.5i SE, USDM) it actually does. There's a keyhole by the trunk-release lever that can be toggled with the "master" key but not the valet key. It will lock out the lever and prevent the trunk from being opened.

    There are keyholes by the rear-seatback-release buttons as well to prevent access to the trunk via folding the rear seats down.

    --
    Help protect civil rights from abuse by the TSA - visit TSA News Blog.
    http://www.tsanewsblog.com