ACLU Sues TSA Over Electronic Device Searches (techcrunch.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ACLU Sues TSA Over Electronic Device Searches (techcrunch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on Monday March 12, 2018 @12:50PM from the shrouded-in-secrecy dept.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Transportation Security Administration over its alleged practices of searching the electronic devices of passengers traveling on domestic flights. "The federal government's policies on searching the phones, laptops, and tablets of domestic air passengers remain shrouded in secrecy," ACLU Foundation of Northern California attorney Vasudha Talla said in a blog post. "TSA is searching the electronic devices of domestic passengers, but without offering any reason for the search," Talla added. "We don't know why the government is singling out some passengers, and we don't know what exactly TSA is searching on the devices. Our phones and laptops contain very personal information, and the federal government should not be digging through our digital data without a warrant." TechCrunch reports: The lawsuit, which is directed toward the TSA field offices in San Francisco and its headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, specifically asks the TSA to hand over records related to its policies, procedures and/or protocols pertaining to the search of electronic devices. This lawsuit comes after a number of reports came in pertaining to the searches of electronic devices of passengers traveling domestically. The ACLU also wants to know what equipment the TSA uses to search, examine and extract any data from passengers' devices, as well as what kind of training TSA officers receive around screening and searching the devices. The ACLU says it first filed FOIA requests back in December, but TSA "subsequently improperly withheld the requested records," the ACLU wrote in a blog post today.

115 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE - NEED 2 FELCH! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 12:51 · Score: -1

G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
gathers G.A.Y N1GGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being G.A.Y N1GGERS.

Are you G.A.Y ?
Are you a N1GGER ?
Are you a G.A.Y N1GGER ?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time G_N_A_A member.
G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing G.A.Y N1GGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of G_N_A_A if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!
First, you have to obtain a copy of G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

You can watch G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE on Youtube.
Second, you need to succeed in posting a G_N_A_A "first post" on slashdot.org , a popular "news for trolls" website
Third, you need to join the official G_N_A_A irc channel #G_N_A_A on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #G_N_A_A, the official G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.easynews.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the G_N_A_A Java IRC client by clicking here.

If you have mod points and would like to support G_N_A_A, please moderate this post up.

This post brought to you by Penisbird , a proud member of the G_N_A_A

G_____________________________________naann_______ ________G N_____________________________nnnaa__nanaaa_______ ________A A____________________aanana__nannaa_nna_an________ ________Y A_____________annna_nnnnnan_aan_aa__na__aa________ ________* G____________nnaana_nnn__nn_aa__nn__na_anaann_MERI CA______N N___________ana__nn_an___an_aa_anaaannnanaa_______ ________I A___________aa__ana_nn___nn_nnnnaa___ana__________ ________G A__________nna__an__na___nn__nnn___SSOCIATION_of__ ________G G__________ana_naa__an___nnn______________________ ________E N__________ananan___nn___aan_IGGER________________ ________R A__________nnna____naa____________________________ ________S A________nnaa_____anan____________________________ ________* G________anaannana________________________________ ________A N________ananaannn_AY_____________________________ ________S A________ana____nn_________IRC-EFNET-#G_N_A_A________ ________S A_______nn_____na_________________________________ ________O *_______aaaan_____________________________________ ________C Gary Niger gary_niger@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A Corporate Headquarters 143 Rolloffle Avenue Tarzana, California 91356
Enid Al-Punjabi enid_al_punjabi@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A World Headquarters No.33 Kyutei Bld. 2F, Shinjuku 2-11-7, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan ????????2??11-6
Copyright (c) 2003-2015 G.A.Y N1GGER Association of America
Ich Bindawalross (London) - G_N_A_A (NYSE:
1. Re:GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE - NEED 2 FELCH! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 14:15 · Score: -1
  
  Have a great...
  KK. .k. H KK. .k. C KK. .k. KK. k . I KK. k . L KK. k . KK k .. L KK k .. I KK k .. KKk u . L Kkl ux. N Kk lan. KK k .. A KK k .. T KK k .. KK. k . R KK. k . O KK. k . KK. .k. Y KK. .k. N KK. .k.
  Hillary for KKK President!
Electronic devices by AHuxley · 2018-03-12 13:07 · Score: 2, Insightful

Who would risk "electronic devices" in any setting thats got security and that US courts have talked about what can be searched over generations?
Stop taking private and business related sensitive "electronic devices" to areas where a search can be expected and a search is legal.
US courts have been asked every generation to offer protections, the right to a lawyer, to courts, to not have a bag searched, to not be questioned, to not have electronic devices questioned.
Every generation expects "airports" to be court corrected over searches.
Every generation the US courts return with the concept that bags and devices can be looked at and questioned as part of travel.
Photographs can be looked at. Bags can be looked into.

When a search is expected:
Travel with a computer that has only a few new business and productivity apps on new storage. Nothing to show, nothing to recover, nothing to find.
The computer like device works when asked to show it can be powered on. The productivity apps run, a new document can be created. No other digital files exist on that computer.
A text file with the contact numbers and details for within the company that match up to a web site.
VPN and use other secure methods later to get files and data in another part of the USA, another nation.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
1. Re:Electronic devices by msauve · 2018-03-12 14:11 · Score: 2
  
  Who would risk "electronic devices" in any setting thats got security and that US courts have talked about what can be searched over generations?
  Aldous,
  
  Lay off the Soma for a while, and come back when you're able to write coherent sentences.
  
  Thank you,
  The Anti World State
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
2. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 14:50 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" is pretty god-damned mother-fucking clear-as-crystal. So pardon the shit out of my mother-fucking french for expecting the god-damned government to get a mother-fucking warrant first.
3. Re:Electronic devices by rtb61 · 2018-03-12 16:27 · Score: 1
  
  By the way, searching is the lie, installing software when you are not looking is the reality. Soon as that phone leaves you sight sell it, if you want your privacy back and make no mistake. They want to take you phone, simply refuse and catch the next flight, you digital life, you are the only person who has rights to it, don't say no and not only are you selling yourself out but in the most gutless fashion imaginable selling out all future generations, why, cowardice. When they ask what do you need to keep secret, look them right in the face and say, fine fucker give me your phone to look at, download and keep a copy, as well as to install what ever software I want. Oh, you don't want me to look at your phone, why are you corrupt, what are you hiding from the public.
  The only reasonable response, give me your fucking phone first.
  
  --
  Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
4. Re:Electronic devices by Plus1Entropy · 2018-03-12 18:41 · Score: 1
  
  IANAL, but my understanding is that courts have found that searches at borders or airports are reasonable.
  
  --
  Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
5. Re:Electronic devices by dwillden · 2018-03-12 20:55 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Searches at borders by Customs when you are crossing said border are considered reasonable. They have a duty and a law enforcement roll to ensure that our borders are secure and that you are not bringing illegal or pirated content into this country.
  
  The TSA has no such ruling, they have no such scope of operations. Their job is to screen for weapons, nothing more. They are not a law enforcement agency. They have no basis or cause to be searching electronic devices for anything. But they are getting away with it because people can't usually afford to miss a flight.
  
  --
  I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
6. Re: Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 21:05 · Score: 0
  
  When you search something you have to have a reason for the search. This is called reasonable suspicion. If youâ(TM)re looking for contraband and explosives then thatâ(TM)s keeping us safe and itâ(TM)s reasonable. If youâ(TM)re looking to extract trade secrets and personal data from our devices then thatâ(TM)s hacking. If youâ(TM)re looking to install malware to facilitate ongoing tracking then thatâ(TM)s hacking and destruction of private property. Regardless, itâ(TM)s not like they can be expected to completely analyze your data before the flight so this canâ(TM)t present a barrier to being allowed to board a plane. Since it canâ(TM)t be used as a reason to prevent boarding then why the heck are they doing it?
  This is exactly why governments approaching cloud providers should be shut down hard. Clearly they believe they should just have access to everything all the time and thatâ(TM)s not reasonable. This is the transformation to a persistent thought-police state and it should scare you. Imagine not being able to write anything negative about the government for fear of this - places like that exist today and we used to condemn them as a nation. Today we do that. What changed?
7. Re:Electronic devices by BlueStrat · 2018-03-12 21:37 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  ANAL, but my understanding is that courts have found that searches at borders or airports are reasonable.
  This is not about people traveling on international flights. This is about US citizens traveling on domestic flights within the continental US and never leaving US airspace.
  Neither the TSA nor Customs/Border authorities have the authority to perform any search of domestic travelers, demand ID/papers, or demand that you answer their questions.
  It is quite likely that these searches are ordered quite deliberately only as verbal orders so as not to leave a paper trail for when FOIA requests start rolling in like now. Likely, they just get a phone call from some department, agency, or agent/officer/official requesting they search some person of interest, follow through, and report back by phone without creating any documents revealing the practice of performing unconstitutional searches without a warrant. Stonewalling or otherwise stymieing legitimate FOIA requests and other legitimate requests for documents, even subpoenas from Congress, seems to be quite in vogue for the US government.
  That's what happens when governments get too big and powerful; they start breaking their own laws with impunity while using those same laws as a weapon against opposition and those who would hold them accountable for their crimes.
  The TSA very likely has not provided any responsive documents in response to the ACLU's FOIA request because the policies in question are not of the written variety so they cannot provide that which they deliberately chose not to create.
  None of which should surprise anyone. The federal government has trampled on every one of the 10 rights in the BoR, I'd contend even the 3rd Amendment which forbids the quartering of soldiers. The reason the Third was created was the King would send soldiers to "quarter" in the homes of colonists they suspected of rebellion so the soldiers could search everything and watch everything they did.
  I contend the US government is quartering *digital soldiers* in our devices in the form of the tools and vulnerabilities created or kept quiet in order to perform the same task as the King's soldiers did in spying on the colonists.
  Our freedoms are disappearing quickly. Better wake up and make some noise, as it may already be too late to stop it.
  Strat
  
  --
  Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
8. Re:Electronic devices by Salgak1 · 2018-03-12 22:27 · Score: 1
  
  Homeland Security defines "the border" as anywhere within 100 miles of any border or shoreline. . .
  https://www.aclu.org/know-your...
9. Re:Electronic devices by dwillden · 2018-03-13 00:00 · Score: 1
  
  Again, reading comprehension. This is the TSA not Customs. Customs gets away with searches in the buffer zone. The TSA has no mission or business searching the contents of electronic devices.
  
  --
  I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
10. Re:Electronic devices by CrimsonAvenger · 2018-03-13 00:31 · Score: 1
  
  "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" is pretty god-damned mother-fucking clear-as-crystal.
  "Shall not be violated". "Shall not be infringed". Interesting how the one is regarded as holy writ, while the other is regarded as...well, not really meaning anything.
  Note that I didn't specify which was which. Because, in any given group of people, there'll be some who go the one way and some the other....
  Really wish we could get everyone on the bandwagon of "Bill of Rights GOOD, infringing same BAD" for the whole list, not just the parts that they particularly like....
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
11. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 01:03 · Score: 0
  
  According to U.S. Congress and John McCain and George Bush (if memory serves), the entire function of the TSA is to stop unauthorized weapons and/or terrorist from getting on planes.
  As long as they are regular electronic devices, the data on them is neither a weapon or a terrorist so it's not subject to their searches.
  Encrypt EVERYTHING, then if asked in court, simply deny that you encrypt anything.
12. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  They have a duty and a law enforcement roll
  Is that law enforecement "roll" purchased at Dunkin Donuts?
13. Re:Electronic devices by gnick · 2018-03-13 02:05 · Score: 2
  
  ...searching is the lie, installing software when you are not looking is the reality.
  Do you have anything to back that up? Sounds paranoid.
  
  They want to take you phone, simply refuse and catch the next flight...
  Right. Because they're going to change the rules between the flight you booked and the next one. Let me know how that works out. I've got shit to do and I'm not going to explain to my customer that I'm a day late because I didn't want TSA to see my selfies.
  
  --
  He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
14. Re:Electronic devices by rickb928 · 2018-03-13 02:08 · Score: 1
  
  Two-thirds of Americans live within 100 miles of a border.
  Including the entire states of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Florida, Delaware, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Hawaii, and virtually all of Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, and most of inhabited California.
  And Washington DC in its entirety, but that's not a state.
  This may not include a sliver of Vermont, though I doubt TSA will let the fly fishers off so easily.
  
  --
  deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
15. Re: Electronic devices by rickb928 · 2018-03-13 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  "When you search something you have to have a reason for the search."
  And this is precisely what the ACLU is asking. What is TSA looking for?
  And of course, this is what TSA does not want to disclose. So here we go.
  
  --
  deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
16. Re:Electronic devices by rickb928 · 2018-03-13 02:12 · Score: 1
  
  Title 8, baby.
  8 U.S.C. 1357(a)(1)-(a)(3) among other statutes. Yes, they exceed their authority, but that's what this fight will be about.
  
  --
  deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
17. Re:Electronic devices by rickb928 · 2018-03-13 02:17 · Score: 1
  
  "As long as they are regular electronic devices, the data on them is neither a weapon or a terrorist"
  https://its.uiowa.edu/support/...
  
  --
  deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
18. Re:Electronic devices by cayenne8 · 2018-03-13 02:25 · Score: 1
  
  Has anyone here actually had their electonic devices searched on a domestic US flight?
  I've never seen a TSA ever ask to even turn something on, much less try to log on and search the device...?
  
  --
  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
19. Re:Electronic devices by dwillden · 2018-03-13 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  The Buffer zone only applies to Customs searches, NOT the TSA. The TSA has no authority to search for law enforcement or customs duties purposes. The Buffer zone is irrelevant. This is about the TSA.
  
  --
  I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
20. Re:Electronic devices by rickb928 · 2018-03-13 02:37 · Score: 1
  
  Prove that. The ACLU is arguing about this now, and that is the point of the FOIA requests, because as I pointed out two-thirds of Americans, by residence, can be part of the buffer zone, and the TSA is searching devices belonging to passengers on entirely domestic travel, and yet does not explain why.
  Prove your claim. TSA may well be conducting these searches claiming they are permitted in Title 8, but until they show why we should not assume anything. TSA may well assert they are justified as if they are Customs.
  
  --
  deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
21. Re:Electronic devices by Nonesuch · 2018-03-13 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  I average about one domestic flight a week, but never out of SFO (where the ACLU complaint originates from), and have never had TSA "search" an electronic device, usually carrying a smartphone, an e-reader/tablet, and a full-size laptop
  Once or twice TSA has asked to do the "swab" explosives test on a laptop, but that's the extent of their interest in my electronics. I'm not saying the ACLU is overreacting to the TSA announcement of "enhanced scrutiny" for small electronics at the X-Ray belt, but you'd think that if TSA was doing CBP-like examinations of the contents of digital storage, there'd be some reports from travelers about it.
  
  --
  
  I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
22. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  There is no US Code, law, Act, etc that can authorize violating the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. and an unconstitutional law is no law at all.
23. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 03:49 · Score: 0
  
  You make it so clear-cut and easy. The problem is that I needed a room mate right then. I had no idea I was quartering a soldier until later, when my rights were suddenly, retroactively violated, infringed, or whatever it is that you're going on about.
24. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 06:04 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, but that was written over 200 years ago, and the founders could never have envisioned such high-capacity devices as we have today.
  After all, the Constitution is a living document, and must change with the times.
25. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 06:48 · Score: 0
  
  usa = totalitarianism regime
  will of the people has not been represented for some time
26. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 08:09 · Score: 0
  
  With regard to quarting soldiers I'm inclined to agree with you. Would it be ok if the gov sent robots to live in your house at all times for the purpose of spying on you? of course not. So why would phone/computer programs that do the same be acceptable?
27. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 09:18 · Score: 0
  
  The justification is probably "Well if we look on your phone we might catch more drug dealers". Based on stories heard from an acquaintance who works at the TSA - the caliber of the organization pretty much sounds like it would drag down the average level of /. discourse as read at -1.
28. Re:Electronic devices by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-15 13:54 · Score: 0
  
  My stuff is all encrypted, so good luck to them if they want to try to look through it. Chances are the uneducated mooks at the TSA wouldn't even know about the hidden partition. I also have backups of everything, so even if they damaged or stole my stuff, I still have access to it.
slashdead by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:13 · Score: 0

20 mins into post over lawsuit over warrantless, electronic searches resulting in a lawsuit and there are no posts? Maybe the recent slashdot downtime was not a ddos or maybe it was and that was just a comfort measure...
just sayin'
1. Re:slashdead by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 21:16 · Score: 0
  
  There was no DDOS, no one cares about this site any more.
  I've given up making positive posts. Day by day I'd post helpful and interesting comments across a range of topics, and never would I receive a reply.
  Now I just troll and shitpost and I get many more replies.
  This place is a wasteland.
2. Re:slashdead by rickb928 · 2018-03-13 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  "Day by day I'd post helpful and interesting comments across a range of topics, and never would I receive a reply."
  You're doing it wrong.
  Expecting replies is sort of pointless here. Really, no one will reply unless they hate you.
  And many will miss your comments, since they will be cruising at +1 or above, to avoid the detritus of AC comments, not caring if they miss a few gems.
  
  --
  deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Why do people demand that they be caught? by AlanObject · 2018-03-12 13:20 · Score: 3, Insightful

I have to travel with my laptop but if I had anything to hide it sure as hell wouldn't be there. Anyone caught at the border with something illegal is an idiot an is destined to be caught.
Why the hell woudn't they encrypt it, stash it on a server, and downloaded when they get home? Alternatively send it to a home server before you even get on the plane? Then, of course, deep-delete everything.
1. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by AHuxley · 2018-03-12 13:26 · Score: 1
  
  Thats the only way now.
  The device can be looked at, turned on, questions asked. An empty computer that works is what a business should be supporting until it is safe to use a computer again.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
2. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:28 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Anyone caught at the border
  This is about standard domestic searches NOT the border exception.
3. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:31 · Score: -1
  
  Because shitty smelly H1B parasites hindu-chimps don't encrypt government secrets for the convenience of ISIS.
4. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:42 · Score: 0
  
  Your right, but a bunch of idiot liberal aspies will downvote this because they think they'll get a handjob for virtue signaling.
5. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:45 · Score: 0
  
  Thanks crypto nazi michigan militia faggot.
6. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by AHuxley · 2018-03-12 13:46 · Score: 0
  
  AC searches are searches.
  Domestic searches can be no less aware of security issues given the past US domestic security issues.
  Why would any nation leave the "domestic" side of their security wide open?
  Why would anyone allow domestic travel to be less secure?
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
7. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 14:14 · Score: 0
  
  Or you be so completely transparent that they don't think you could be hiding anything in the first place.
  About a half hour before I know I'm going through a secure checkpoint, I turn off any and all security on my devices. No password, no fingerprint, nothing. Everything is just turn-on-and-go. After I'm through the checkpoint, I turn on my normal password and lock protections.
  Usually nothing happens, but one time when I was asked to hand over my phone, I did so, and he pressed the home button, saw that it didn't have any kind of lock or password, and immediately handed it back to me without perusing it at all.
8. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 14:26 · Score: 0
  
  Are you saying that every scumbag cop (and most cops are scum) should be allowed to randomly stop people on the street and root through their phones and laptops. After all, if it catches one terrorist, it did it's job of keeping the cheeeeellllldren saaaafe.
9. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by AHuxley · 2018-03-12 15:09 · Score: 1
  
  The street is not security at an airport AC.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
10. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 15:58 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  "Why would anyone allow domestic travel to be less secure?"
  First and foremost, FREEDOM you asshole. Secondly, this sad state of security that you support is not sustainable. It costs way too much, offering little protection, and impedes freedom. No one, including the government can protect you all of the time. Wake up to reality.
11. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 16:13 · Score: 1
  
  The street is not security at an airport AC.
  Similarly, in and of itself, using an airplane as a means of travel is not 'reasonable suspicion' of a crime.
  Perhaps we should amend the Constitution regarding issues such as the 2nd, 4th, 5th and other amendments. Perhaps we shouldn't. Either way, there are defined ways to do just that, or not, depending on the will of the people. Until the Constitution is actually changed, the law is the law as it exists here and now.
12. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Type44Q · 2018-03-12 16:18 · Score: 1
  
  Please shut up until you can type coherent sentences...
13. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 16:18 · Score: 0
  
  Aww, RWNJ snowflake is all triggered, sad.
14. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 16:24 · Score: 0
  
  Anyone caught at the border
  This is about standard domestic searches NOT the border exception.
  By the border patrols own definition, the border extends 100 miles from any shore, international border or international airport. By that definition 75% of the US public lives in the "no rights border zone".
15. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by AHuxley · 2018-03-12 16:25 · Score: 0
  
  AC re " the law is the law as it exists here and now."
  Many generations of people have attempted over decades to define a US airport as not been able to search their bag without court paperwork in their name for their bag.
  US courts side with the "airports" and the ability to search and question.
  Searching is legal and all rights exist before, after and during the search at an airport.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
16. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by dwillden · 2018-03-12 21:05 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Why? Maybe because such searches are not in the scope or mission of the TSA. The TSA is not a law enforcement agency, they've tried to become one. but have been repeatedly rebuffed. Get caught trying to pass through security with a weapon and they call the airport or local city police to arrest you because they can't.
  
  They have no business searching any electronic devices. Their mission is simple, screen passengers and their checked luggage for weapons capable of bringing down or hijacking an aircraft. Nothing more.
  
  This is not a border crossing. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the right to Travel freely within and out of this country as one of the non-enumerated fundamental rights of this country. These searches are a massive invasion of our 4th amendment rights and a massive mission creep of an agency that has a very simple job (that they are rather inept at doing).
  
  They are not Customs which is tasked to control illegal content (pirated IP, Kidde porn etc) from entering the country. They are not a Law enforcement agency (FBI) tasked with trying to stop the existence and movement of illegal content. They are the TSA, tasked with making sure no weapons or bombs get into our airport Secure zones.
  
  Please explain what content security screeners need to be looking for. What file (that a TSA goon is likely to find) is going to threaten a flight?
  
  --
  I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
17. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 21:07 · Score: 0
  
  The TSA is not Customs. The border Buffer has zero relevance to this discussion.
18. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Kaenneth · 2018-03-12 21:12 · Score: 1
  
  Get off the Internet until you learn to be civil.
19. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 21:19 · Score: 0
  
  "airport or local city police to arrest you because they can't."
  They don't arrest you. The police are called to resolve the situation, but accidentally carrying a gun into a secure area and having it detected by the scans is not a crime. The police are mostly required for safe disposal of the weapon, that is provided the traveler elects to get rid of it and continue with their journey.
20. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 21:22 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Oh shit, my bank account has a password on it. I must be committing wire fraud and I should turn myself in.
  The presence of a lock does not indicate guilt. We put locks on things because there are bad people in the world. Under the DMCA *you* can be jailed for breaking a DRM lock. If the government is just going around pipe-wrenching people to break open all locks then THEY ARE THE BAD PEOPLE.
  This is an end-run around the constitution. If anywhere less than 100 miles from a border is a constitution-free zone and they slice up the US states into 100 mile wide bordered âoestatesâ then the constitution doesnâ(TM)t apply *anywhere*...we should just throw the constitution away and be done with it. The founding principles of this great country are gone and weâ(TM)re living in the tyranny that our forefathers escaped here to avoid in the first place. So...The next Mayflower is going to Mars?
21. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 21:25 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Shit, well scratch that, I was wrong. You are likely to be arrested, but quite a few lawyers claim they can get you off:
  https://www.ciyoudixonlaw.com/firearms-law/what-happens-if-i-accidentally-take-a-gun-through-an-airport-security-checkpoint/
  https://nolacriminallaw.com/the-problem-of-firearms-at-tsa-checkpoints/
  https://criminal-defense-attorney-tampa.blogspot.hr/2012/03/accidentally-bringing-gun-to-airport.html
  The short of it is you should always clearly state that you did not know there was a firearm in your bag. That will get you off the criminal charge, but the slimy TSA fucks will still hit you with a $10k civil fine. There are a number of ways to get that down, but you may still end up paying something....sigh.
22. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 22:22 · Score: 0
  
  You don't even need that. Think up. 100 miles is clearly not US territory. The space border looms over alll of us. TSA is protecting us from real aliens!
23. Re: Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 01:43 · Score: 0
  
  You can thank that jackass "security researcher" who fucked with an airplane via his laptop.
24. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Sloppy · 2018-03-13 04:05 · Score: 2
  
  I have to travel with my laptop but if I had anything to hide it sure as hell wouldn't be there. Anyone caught at the border with something illegal is an idiot an is destined to be caught.
  [Emphasis mine.] Ok, now imagine you don't have anything to hide. What happens then? Do you think that magically prevents the search?
  The government got caught red-handed doing the searches, and they arn't even denying they were doing it. They did the searches before, and independent of, whether or not they found anything interesting. So the whole "if I had anything to hide" thing is totally irrelevant.
  
  Why the hell woudn't they encrypt it, stash it on a server, and downloaded when they get home? Alternatively send it to a home server before you even get on the plane? Then, of course, deep-delete everything.
  Whatever "it" is, they're not going to know whether it's on your phone or not until after they've committed the unjustified search. Wherever you store "it", that doesn't prevent the search from happening. And the search (not them finding or planting something) is what's the problem here.
  
  --
  As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
25. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 04:11 · Score: 0
  
  Why would any nation leave the "domestic" side of their security wide open?
  Because America is different from other countries. The government is our bitch, or at least it's supposed to be. The desires of the people are more important than whatever the government says it wants.
  
  Why would anyone allow domestic travel to be less secure?
  We're not! We're trying stop making it less secure. That's why the ACLU is going to court: to stop the government from violating our security.
26. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by AlanObject · 2018-03-13 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  Do you think that magically prevents the search?
  I don't get how you could conclude that I would think something like that.
  The point is that a search -- legal or illegal, consensual or not -- won't find anything if I don't keep anything on there that the law considers contraband or evidence of illegality.
  My other point is there is absolutely no reason to have anything like that on your portable device except stupidity.
27. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 04:53 · Score: 0
  
  I would travel with a laptop with a freshly installed OS, and have any info available on a private server to be downloaded at my destination. When I was ready to come home or travel more, I would do a "deep delete" and fresh install of the OS again. Lather, rinse, repeat as necessary. Same with a phone. Carry a "dumb" burner phone, and memorize any important numbers. Destroy the phone just before leaving for home.
28. Re:Why do people demand that they be caught? by Nonesuch · 2018-03-13 07:03 · Score: 1
  
  AC searches are searches. Domestic searches can be no less aware of security issues given the past US domestic security issues. Why would any nation leave the "domestic" side of their security wide open? Why would anyone allow domestic travel to be less secure?
  No, searches are not searches
  Customs and Border Protection (CBP) searches aren't about securing the plane or airport, they are about the Federal government controlling what enters the country. Traditionally, Customs is limited to searches when crossing the border, though they've managed to redefine "border" to anywhere within 100 miles of any national border.
  Not looking at what kind of pirated software a citizen has on her laptop when taking a domestic flight from San Francisco to Dallas does not make the country any less secure.
  
  --
  
  I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
TSA has ONE job by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

TSA has ONE job. Keep people from bringing dangerous items on planes. The data on electronic devices doesn't qualify as such. This actually makes flying less safe because it distracts TSA from keeping truly dangerous items off of planes.
1. Re:TSA has ONE job by AHuxley · 2018-03-12 13:32 · Score: 2
  
  Data on electronic devices can show a persons support of and funding for a banned group.
  That they travelled to a nation to support and funded a banned group.
  Photographs, faith based and political support for groups of interest to the USA. Funds for and meetings with people and groups of interest to the USA.
  GPS, images that show the device owner when questioned was in a nation they failed to mention when asked about.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
2. Re:TSA has ONE job by youngone · 2018-03-12 14:02 · Score: 2
  
  I thought the TSA's job was to shout "PAPERS PLEASE" at Americans to get them used to being watched by their own homegrown Gestpo.
3. Re:TSA has ONE job by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 14:13 · Score: 0
  
  How do you know I don't have a virus that I could upload to the plane and crash it? You have seen Independence Day right? Just a little java and everything explodes!
4. Re:TSA has ONE job by Nonesuch · 2018-03-12 14:18 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Data on electronic devices can show a persons support of and funding for a banned group. That they travelled to a nation to support and funded a banned group. Photographs, faith based and political support for groups of interest to the USA. Funds for and meetings with people and groups of interest to the USA. GPS, images that show the device owner when questioned was in a nation they failed to mention when asked about.
  While these are within the scope of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) search, all of the above are outside the allowed activities of the TSA.
  The article states " This lawsuit comes after a number of reports came in pertaining to the searches of electronic devices of passengers traveling domestically.... TSA does, however, have public policies pertaining to the search and seizure of electronic devices at the border and during international trips."
  The complaint seems to conflate TSA and CBP searches, and alleges TSA is searching the contents of electronic devices held by domestic travelers flying through SFO, but provides no evidence to support this claim.
  
  --
  
  I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
5. Re:TSA has ONE job by b0s0z0ku · 2018-03-12 14:30 · Score: 1
  
  TSA requires a valid ID -- they don't ask for a passport or about international travel.
6. Re:TSA has ONE job by BlueStrat · 2018-03-12 14:39 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The complaint [aclunc.org] seems to conflate TSA and CBP searches, and alleges TSA is searching the contents of electronic devices held by domestic travelers flying through SFO, but provides no evidence to support this claim.
  
  A complaint is not the document where evidence is provided. The complainant may well be holding their cards close so that the TSA hasn't the chance to alter, conceal, or destroy additional corroborating evidence they might be currently unaware they possess.
  Not providing evidence in a court complaint filing is normal and not indicative of anything.
  Strat
  
  --
  Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
7. Re:TSA has ONE job by duke_cheetah2003 · 2018-03-12 19:58 · Score: 1
  
  TSA has ONE job. Keep people from bringing dangerous items on planes. The data on electronic devices doesn't qualify as such. This actually makes flying less safe because it distracts TSA from keeping truly dangerous items off of planes.
  Just a little devil's avocation here. One the items people often overlook as potentially dangerous is the people themselves. Searching electronic devices could give insights into the person whom owns it. Not saying this is right or even legal to be doing, just pointing out a reasonable justification.
8. Re:TSA has ONE job by TheRaven64 · 2018-03-12 20:55 · Score: 1
  
  The original justification for turning on a computer at airport security was that it might just be a bomb in a laptop case. That's far less convincing now that you can buy a cheap single-board computer and put both a bomb and a computer in a typical laptop case.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
9. Re:TSA has ONE job by dwillden · 2018-03-12 21:17 · Score: 1
  
  That may be true about what the data may show. But it's outside the TSA's scope and mission. They are NOT law enforcement. It's not their job to find out what people might be planning in the future, or what groups they might support. Their job is simple. Keep weapons and bombs out of the secure areas of airports.
  
  Even the most radical ISIS believer, if they have no weapons or explosives cannot be refused entry to the secure zone of an airport by TSA. That isn't their job. Their job is to make sure he has nothing on him at that point that can be used as a weapon to hijack or destroy an airplane in flight. Funds, interests, photographs, support documentation, literature, none of that has any relevance to the TSA.
  
  The TSA is not Customs, it is not the FBI or any other Law enforcement agency. It is a physical security screening agency.
  
  --
  I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
10. Re:TSA has ONE job by Mal-2 · 2018-03-12 21:34 · Score: 1
  
  It's never been convincing, since anyone can simply trade battery life for illicit cargo capacity. Instead of a nine-cell battery, you can have a three cell battery and 1/3 the run time -- but the machine will still operate just fine for that shorter time. The space formerly occupied by the other six cells can be filled with whatever you like. The risk has gone down over time as the machines get smaller and smaller, thus leaving less space to substitute contents.
  
  --
  How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
11. Re:TSA has ONE job by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 22:09 · Score: 0
  
  Data on electronic devices can show a persons support of and funding for a banned group.
  That they travelled to a nation to support and funded a banned group.
  Photographs, faith based and political support for groups of interest to the USA. Funds for and meetings with people and groups of interest to the USA.
  GPS, images that show the device owner when questioned was in a nation they failed to mention when asked about.
  Are you aware that we're talking about domestic travelers here? That "nation" you speak of IS the United States.
12. Re:TSA has ONE job by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 23:53 · Score: 0
  
  TSA has ONE job. Keep people from bringing dangerous items on planes. The data on electronic devices doesn't qualify as such. This actually makes flying less safe because it distracts TSA from keeping truly dangerous items off of planes.
  Nope, check the ATSA act and CFR 1500ish - TSA has quite a few jobs, some having absolutely nothing to due with planes.
13. Re:TSA has ONE job by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 23:55 · Score: 0
  
  Bleh, can't spell, still posting ac though.
14. Re:TSA has ONE job by AmiMoJo · 2018-03-13 00:47 · Score: 1
  
  Which all sounds like a really terrible way of detecting people who might want to harm the US.
  A lot of those people are radicalized in "safe" countries. People like ISIS realized that it is much easier to just radicalize people over the internet than to try to cross borders. Cheaper and more effective too. Weapons are everywhere, just hire a truck or buy some kitchen knives.
  On the other hand, you probably want people like journalists and aid workers to be able to visit those countries, and ideally want to avoid placing worthless restrictions on innocent citizens.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
15. Re:TSA has ONE job by flink · 2018-03-13 01:04 · Score: 1
  
  Searching electronic devices could give insights into the person whom owns it. Not saying this is right or even legal to be doing, just pointing out a reasonable justification.
  If it's neither ethical nor legal, it's pretty hard to argue that it's reasonable.
16. Re:TSA has ONE job by Sloppy · 2018-03-13 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  Data on electronic devices can show a persons support of and funding for a banned group.
  Some day I should download this data that you're talking about, and smuggle it onto the plane. Then I'll hit a pilot over the head with it, and the plane will be mine!!
  
  --
  As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
17. Re:TSA has ONE job by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2018-03-13 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  We require warrants for that, because long ago The People realized kings would filtch through the papers of uppity political opponents to find something minor to tag them with.
  That value-judgement has aready been made and placed in the Constitution.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
18. Re:TSA has ONE job by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2018-03-13 09:35 · Score: 1
  
  Data on electronic devices can show a persons support of and funding for a banned group.
  Yes, that's called a search of your papers and property and requires a warrant.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Freedom is a fantasy, and so are your "rights". by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:33 · Score: -1

Welcome to reality.
The government will do what it wants to you, and you can't do shit about it.
Chew on that for a while and see if it tastes any better.
Or maybe you should just see who posted something new on Facebook, you goddamned worthless bunch of hairless apes.
1. Re:Freedom is a fantasy, and so are your "rights". by AHuxley · 2018-03-12 13:50 · Score: 1
  
  AC just stop taking phones and laptops loaded up with sensitive business and personal information to areas where a search is expected and legal.
  Once at the destination use a VPN to access important information.
  When back from travel enjoy the use of a normal phone and laptop again.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
2. Re:Freedom is a fantasy, and so are your "rights". by Nonesuch · 2018-03-12 14:28 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  The articles referenced by the ACLU are in regards to ehanced X-Ray scanning as well as the usual "swab for explosives residue", I see no articles anywhere online talking about TSA wanting to review files stored on a laptop hard drive.
  
  AC just stop taking phones and laptops loaded up with sensitive business and personal information to areas where a search is expected and legal..
  A search of the digital contents of an phone or laptop storage is neither expected, nor legal, when traveling purely domestically from one US airport to another.
  I take day trips from a US airport to another US airport (e.g. ORD->LGA) for work, usually flying in early in the morning, attending meetings (at which I need both laptop and phone and the data within), then flying back the same day. I believe my employer would support me if I refused to unlock my encrypted device for it to be searched, and as the device belongs to my employer, they'd be the ones filing a suit if TSA or CBP confiscated the device in order to perform a search.
  As my flights for work are always purely domestic travel, such a search is not expected, and probably not legal.
  
  --
  
  I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
3. Re:Freedom is a fantasy, and so are your "rights". by AHuxley · 2018-03-12 15:13 · Score: 1
  
  The word "airport" and security is not just about normal travel or day trips around the USA.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
4. Re:Freedom is a fantasy, and so are your "rights". by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 23:00 · Score: 0
  
  i used to get profiled in airports in texas, back when i took a lot of short hops on southwest and eagle for work. every fucking time, a swap for 'explosives' they always claimed. but you know damn well they were looking for drugs. they'd haul your ass away if you refused the search.
  a white person (sometimes with a co-worker, also white) with only one carry-on (occasionally a laptop bag, which never got looked inside of)... this was back in the 90s, well before the tsa.
How much? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:39 · Score: 0

How much you wanna bet the TSA gives the "Sargent Schultz" statement?
One Life by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 13:45 · Score: -1

If all of these extra precautions save just ONE life. It is worth it.
1. Re:One Life by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 15:02 · Score: 0
  
  If all of these extra precautions save just ONE life. It is worth it.
  Extra precautions cost lives.
  1. They create predictable and exploitable bottlenecks.
  2. If you believe in linear hypothesis rapescan machines are causing scores of real cancer deaths each and every year.
  3. Anxiety and stress associated with fear of being raped (both figuratively and literally) by TSA is harmful to public health both directly and indirectly as it contributes to unwillingness of public to fly. This results in more driving related injury and deaths than would otherwise exist. By some accounts of those who have looked into the numbers this is in excess of 100 extra deaths per year.
  4. When you consider budget of TSA is now similar to that of FBI there is real question of opportunity costs of funds being diverted to TSA that could have otherwise been put to more productive use in other ways with higher odds of saving and or improving lives.
2. Re:One Life by Scarletdown · 2018-03-12 15:17 · Score: 2
  
  Shredding the 4th Amendment just to feel a little safer? Go fuck yourself and drink Draino. Unless of course you were just trolling. In that case, drink Draino and go fuck yourself. :p
  
  --
  This space unintentionally left blank.
You don't have to give up sight of your property by mbeckman · 2018-03-12 14:15 · Score: 4, Interesting

The TSA's own rules say that you can keep your belongings in sight while they are being inspected. The ACLU said of one woman passenger searched in the security line: "The agents did not ask her to unlock the phones, but took them for at least 10 minutes out of her view, she said, adding that she quickly became distraught." She should have loudly and repeatedly demanded to regain sight of her property. I've done this and gotten them to comply.
Land of the Free by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 14:23 · Score: 0

or at least those who do not travel by plane.
Re:You don't have to give up sight of your propert by mbeckman · 2018-03-12 14:24 · Score: 1

"Carry On: It is recommended that you keep your belongings in sight during the screening process. If you are carrying or wearing an item that might alarm our officers, requiring additional screening, you may ask that your belongings be brought to you to keep your property in sight." https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2016/...
Re:You don't have to give up sight of your propert by b0s0z0ku · 2018-03-12 14:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

Better solution: Bring a phone or laptop with hidden recording enabled and keylogger through a TSA checkpoint. See exactly what the fucking pigs are doing -- if it's recorded and keylogged, it's no longer secret. Post it on Youtube and Cryptome.
Standard response by Chelloveck · 2018-03-12 14:43 · Score: 4, Funny

Dear ACLU, here is the information you requested. [REDACTED][redacted][REDACTED][redacted][REDACTED][redacted][REDACTED][redacted][REDACTED][redacted][REDACTED][redacted][REDACTED][redacted][REDACTED][redacted][REDACTED][redacted] and the horse you rode in on. Love, TSA.

--
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
Re:You don't have to give up sight of your propert by PinkyGigglebrain · 2018-03-12 15:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

People!

Could we please stop calling police and other LEOs "Pigs"?

To the best of my knowledge no member of the species Sus (includes boar, warthog, etc.) has ever done anything to deserve that kind of insult.

Call the TSA and LEO's what they are: "Brownshirts"
Re:You don't have to give up sight of your propert by Travelsonic · 2018-03-12 15:28 · Score: 1

The TSA is not law enforcement though - which makes the "pig" label even less appropriate, interestingly.

--
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
Re: You don't have to give up sight of your proper by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 15:44 · Score: 0

But for the 99% of people who don't know how to do that, they should demand to keep their gear in sight. I never give up everything at once, and ask to record all extra-intensive inspections.
The No Fly List by aberglas · 2018-03-12 16:16 · Score: 2

Law enforcement needs to go through the courts to punish (at least in theory). The TSA can just put you on a No Fly List. No appeal possible.
Do not mess with them.
(It always amazes me that the USA has the strongest constitution yet the ugliest laws. What would the USA be like without any constitution, better or far worse?)
1. Re:The No Fly List by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 16:31 · Score: 0
  
  Appeal is possible. And the more lawsuits there are against the TSA filth, the more likely they are to desist at what they're doing.
2. Re:The No Fly List by PinkyGigglebrain · 2018-03-13 10:43 · Score: 1
  
  you kind of proved my point.
  
  "Do not mess with them."
  I'm sure during the 1930s many of the German people felt the same about the Brownshirts and didn't do anything. We all know how well that worked don't we?
  
  The TSA are capable of extrajudicial action that affects the lives and freedoms of people, and not just US Citizens. Better to speak now while we still have a voice than watch silently as another nation falls into tyranny.
Stopped Flying... by rally2xs · 2018-03-12 17:02 · Score: 4, Interesting

...because of TSA nonsense. If they're going to feel me up, if the airlines are going to beat me up, and if they want to look at my phone and computer, they're going to have to chase me down at 80 mph on I-10 to do it. I like to drive anyway, and they can take their big brother state and shove it. All they're doing, from the bag searches to these electronic searches, are illegal under the 4th Amendment according to Judge Napolitano on Fox News. He was very specific. Illegal. But they just do it anyway.
Stick my bags in the trunk, phone on my belt and computer on the seat beside me, and they're going to have to work to see any of 'em.
1. Re:Stopped Flying... by dwillden · 2018-03-12 21:23 · Score: 1
  
  It should be noted that I-10 runs within the 100 mile buffer zone. You are subject to ICE checkpoints on that freeway. Better to move north to I-80, only rarely does it come within reach of any border buffer zone.
  
  --
  I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
2. Re:Stopped Flying... by rally2xs · 2018-03-12 22:54 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, but they just waved me thru in both directions last week. They can't put together the people and infrastructure to go searching everything on that highway.
3. Re:Stopped Flying... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 00:02 · Score: 0
  
  I stopped flying because of the "take off your belt and shoes" procedure. I
  have done enough of this. At no charge, mind you, at the welfare office.
  At the courthouse. At the places where people don't even have a wallet to
  put money in, FFS. I used to enjoy traveling, to see different places and
  meet people. My cousin paid for the privilege of being 'untouchable' by the
  TSA, because he is special -- the brightest of the bright, even in university's
  gifted academe.
  Thank you, ACLU, for fighting the good fight; but go big or go home. Let's
  go big: A special sticker or pass, that when officials see this, we are
  waved through, no groping necessary -- no need to inspect electronic devices as they are surrendered without question, and kept in ziplock bags away fromthe cabin. We are antisocial and carry uninteresting personal information. We just get the gizmos when we exit the terminal at our destination, and would love to find them still sealed with the red tape that says Break the seal if you want the full body cavity search upon arrival
  We are slashdotters, dammit Hands off my gadget, and my tech!%
4. Re:Stopped Flying... by AmiMoJo · 2018-03-13 00:51 · Score: 1
  
  For that reason self-driving cars are really going to hurt airlines. It's a shame trains are so crappy in the US or they would be another good option. In Japan it's barely worth flying anywhere on the main islands because by the time you have been to the airport and flown the train is usually faster and drops you off right in the city centre.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Plausable Denability by duke_cheetah2003 · 2018-03-12 19:55 · Score: 1

This sound like a good use case for TrueCrypt's good ole hidden partition setup. Just put in the password for the clean boring copy of your OS for these goons.
1. Re:Plausable Denability by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 20:19 · Score: 0
  
  Ahh the good ole hidden partition, aka there ain't nobody here but us chickens.
Re:You don't have to give up sight of your propert by DNS-and-BIND · 2018-03-12 22:28 · Score: -1

Antifa are the brownshirts. Oh wait, sorry they wear masks, which makes them KKK. Hmm, they're not white, they wear black, which makes them blackshirts. There we go, always nice to establish a proper taxonomy.

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Re:You don't have to give up sight of your propert by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-12 23:56 · Score: 0

Could we please stop calling police and other LEOs "Pigs"?
When they start behaving themselves and obey the law, I'll consider it, motherfucker.
Define "unreasonable" by sjbe · 2018-03-12 23:57 · Score: 2

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" is pretty god-damned mother-fucking clear-as-crystal. So pardon the shit out of my mother-fucking french for expecting the god-damned government to get a mother-fucking warrant first.
Here's the problem with your little rant. They know the weakness in your argument and in that particular amendment is in defining the word "unreasonable". If they convince a court that the search is a reasonable one then that whole pesky amendment problem goes away. They don't have to get a warrant if they can convince the courts that what they are doing is reasonable. The entire amendment hinges on what we define the word "unreasonable" to mean and that is the bit under attack.
the phone is dead by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 02:26 · Score: 0

Between the government and telemarketers the phone is dead.
they are searching for... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-03-13 05:54 · Score: 0

My guess is that they are searching for 2 things only:
1. Browser history of visiting jihadist sites.
2. Child porn.
A mystery by Manqueman · 2018-03-13 21:50 · Score: 1

Not to go all The Defenders (60s TV show), but what's the probable cause behind all of the rampant searching of people and what they're carrying? Is it that since anyone might be a terrorist everyone is a legitimate suspect so it's all good? Seems to me that this police state crap is unconstitutional and with even less basis than NYC's stop + frisk BS.