Pilot to TSA: 'No Groping Me and No Naked Photos'

[slow1911s]

That's one way of doing it.

Agreed. In the context of air travel and the pilot's experience the question was about electronic body scans. In the course of routine commercial air transport security, you're opposed to electronic body scans?

When, if ever, would a body scan be appropriate in the context of commercial air transportation?

 

[eldirector]

Agreed. In the context of air travel and the pilot's experience the question was about electronic body scans. In the course of routine commercial air transport security, you're opposed to electronic body scans?

When, if ever, would a body scan be appropriate in the context of commercial air transportation?

A question with a question, if I may....

When is it appropriate for a passenger to disrobe for TSA personnel, in the context of commercial air travel?

 

[CarmelHP]

A question with a question, if I may....

When is it appropriate for a passenger to disrobe for TSA personnel, in the context of commercial air travel?

The answer is, "whenever the crack, highly trained, counter-terrorist TSA person demands it." And you better smile while they do it, too, maggot.

 

[slow1911s]

A question with a question, if I may....

When is it appropriate for a passenger to disrobe for TSA personnel, in the context of commercial air travel?

Do you mean physically disrobe?

 

[slow1911s]

Since it hasn't been quoted, this is part of the USC that addresses airport screening. - United States Code: Title 49,44901. Screening passengers and property | LII / Legal Information Institute

§ 44901. Screening passengers and property




(a) In General.— The Under Secretary of Transportation for Security shall provide for the screening of all passengers and property, including United States mail, cargo, carry-on and checked baggage, and other articles, that will be carried aboard a passenger aircraft operated by an air carrier or foreign air carrier in air transportation or intrastate air transportation. In the case of flights and flight segments originating in the United States, the screening shall take place before boarding and shall be carried out by a Federal Government employee (as defined in section 2105 of title 5, United States Code), except as otherwise provided in section 44919 or 44920 and except for identifying passengers and baggage for screening under the CAPPS and known shipper programs and conducting positive bag-match programs.
(b) Supervision of Screening.— All screening of passengers and property at airports in the United States where screening is required under this section shall be supervised by uniformed Federal personnel of the Transportation Security Administration who shall have the power to order the dismissal of any individual performing such screening.
(c) Checked Baggage.— A system must be in operation to screen all checked baggage at all airports in the United States as soon as practicable but not later than the 60th day following the date of enactment of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act.

 

[jedi]

Claire Wolfe has an interesting solution on the path to getting rid of the porno scanners.
Living Freedom Blog Archive Oppose the porno-scanners. Write a letter (but not to Washington).

Well here is my draft of my letter to disney regarding thi issue.
Comments, suggestions?

Robert A. Iger November 1, 2010
President & C.E.O.
Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista Street
Burbank, CA 91521
Dear Mr. Iger,
My family and I returned from our first Disney vacation last month (09/06 through 09/13). We stayed at the Caribbean Beach Resort at Walt Disney World and everyone had a wonderful time. Our entire time at Disney was magical. It had been over 20 years since I had been to Disney as a child when my parents took my sisters and me. Experiencing Disney through the eyes of a father and seeing the smiles on my children (ages 5 and 2) was priceless. Thank you for being able to provide such a magical experience. The last night of our stay, we received a pamphlet with a discount (free dinning plan) to return in 2011 and experience a new vacation. My wife and I eagerly talked about doing another vacation in 2011 that night and the week after we returned from vacation.
However, I now have a growing concern that I am not sure how to address. We live in NW Indiana and must fly from Chicago to Orlando in order to visit Disney. However, a new set of rules by The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has my wife and I concern. TSA has announced the expansion of their whole body imaging (WBI) program to major airports by next year. This means that either I must choose to
1) expose my family to a dose of ionized radiation by the WBI machine so that it can create a nude image of each of my family members which can be stored and/or released to the internet if the operator so chooses,
2) if we opt-out of the WBI machine then my family will be groped/frisked by a TSA agents to included our private parts in order to ascertain the same level of details that the WBI does or
3) choosing not to fly which means we cannot visit Disney and instead find something closer (drive able) to spend our next vacation at.
My wife and I have a strong concern over option 1 on our children and exposing them at such an early age to radiation from a machine that has not undergone long term testing for possible side effects. In addition, the ability of the machine to store nude images of our children for the operator or anyone online to see if very unsettling. Option 2 is no better and again my children will be subjugated to being “felt up” in places where they have been told is a “no-no” for a stranger to touch them. As such right now my wife and I are having a very hard time deciding how to get to Disney to re-experience the magic. It’s not an issue of not being able to afford another Disney vacation for us. It’s an issue of not wanting to have our children experience the unpleasant nature of air travel under the current TSA rules.
Right now my wife and I are happy that we were able to experience at least one family Disney vacation. This is bitter sweet, however, if we cannot experience more in the future due to the air travel experience that TSA is creating.


[STRIKE]
PLEASE NOTE I HAVE NOT CHECKED FOR GRAMMER YET. I SEE A TON OF GRAMMER ISSUES RIGHT NOW AS I PROOFREAD THE PAPER COPY.
[/STRIKE]

 

[Joe Williams]

Agreed. In the context of air travel and the pilot's experience the question was about electronic body scans. In the course of routine commercial air transport security, you're opposed to electronic body scans?

When, if ever, would a body scan be appropriate in the context of commercial air transportation?

I don't think it's ever appropriate, lacking actual PC to believe a crime has been or is about to be committed.

 

[mrjarrell]

Looks like a nice, powerful letter. Lots of letters like this to Disney and other places will do more than sending them to TSA or the congress cretins.

You did mispell grammar, tho. LOL.

 

[slow1911s]

I don't think it's ever appropriate, lacking actual PC to believe a crime has been or is about to be committed.

What would be sufficient probable cause, in your eyes?

 

[eldirector]

Do you mean physically disrobe?

Yep. The scanners have the ability to provide a very detailed image of your nude body. So, yes, physically disrobe.

Under what circumstances can a TSA agent have you strip? Under what circumstances can they have your child strip?

 

[Joe Williams]

What would be sufficient probable cause, in your eyes?

Finding explosives or weapons in luggage, for example. IOW... what would be sufficient probable cause to strip search you if the cops had stopped you walking down the road?

 

[ultraspec]

You guys see this yet? Those imaging machines arent really safe I can bet that but here is the proof that makes me REALLY question their supposed safeness

http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf

 

[slow1911s]

Finding explosives or weapons in luggage, for example.

Finding an explosive in a bag or on a person about to enter a controlled area of a commercial airport isn't probable cause - that's a crime under the USC.

§ 46314. Entering aircraft or airport area in violation of security requirements


(a) Prohibition.— A person may not knowingly and willfully enter, in violation of security requirements prescribed under section 44901, 44903 (b) or (c), or 44906 of this title, an aircraft or an airport area that serves an air carrier or foreign air carrier.
(b) Criminal Penalty.— (1) A person violating subsection (a) of this section shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
(2) A person violating subsection (a) of this section with intent to commit, in the aircraft or airport area, a felony under a law of the United States or a State shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

§ 44925. Deployment and use of detection equipment at airport screening checkpoints




(a) Weapons and Explosives.— The Secretary of Homeland Security shall give a high priority to developing, testing, improving, and deploying, at airport screening checkpoints, equipment that detects nonmetallic, chemical, biological, and radiological weapons, and explosives, in all forms, on individuals and in their personal property. The Secretary shall ensure that the equipment alone, or as part of an integrated system, can detect under realistic operating conditions the types of weapons and explosives that terrorists would likely try to smuggle aboard an air carrier aircraft.

IOW... what would be sufficient probable cause to strip search you if the cops had stopped you walking down the road?

Walking down the road and being in a commercial airport are entirely different things under the law. In this state, the act of purchasing a ticket makes you subject to search under IC. USC mandates that the TSA search all persons and property for weapons and explosives.

Don't misunderstand me. I am not advocating an unreasonable search of any person at any time. However, I believe that a different set of rules are in play at airports for a reason.

 

[mrjarrell]

Here's a new article on the issue. Apparently, the radiation is higher than they are admitting. You could get cancer, especially if you have the genes for skin cancer propensity.
Airport body scanners deliver radiation dose 20 times higher than first thought | Mail Online

 

[mrjarrell]

Looks as if the other pilots are starting to catch on. Too bad the writer of the letter didn't have the courage to encourage other pilots to just say "No!". We'd get better and faster results that way.

American Airlines Pilots Revolt Against The TSA | The Daily Feed | Minyanville.com

 

[purd002]

Pilots urged by union to avoid these scans now . . .

Pilots urged to avoid body scanning - CNN.com

Pilots' unions for US Airways and American Airlines are urging their members to avoid full-body scanning at airport security checkpoints, citing health risks and concerns about intrusiveness and security officer behavior.
"Pilots should NOT submit to AIT (Advanced Imaging Technology) screening," wrote Capt. Mike Cleary, president of the U.S. Airline Pilots Association, in a letter to members this week. USAPA represents more than 5,000 US Airways pilots. "Based on currently available medical information, USAPA has determined that frequent exposure to TSA-operated scanner devices may subject pilots to significant health risks," Cleary wrote.
American Airlines pilots have also received guidance from their union, the Allied Pilots Association, to decline full-body scanning. APA represents 11,000 pilots. "It's safe to say that most of the APA leadership shares my view that no pilot at American Airlines should subject themselves to the needless privacy invasion and potential health risks caused by the AIT body scanners," APA president David Bates said in a letter to members.
Both unions are concerned about the effects of repeated exposure to small doses of radiation emitted by the backscatter technology used in some of the Transportation Security Administration's full-body scanners.
In the course of their daily duties, pilots are routinely exposed to elevated levels of naturally occurring atmospheric radiation, which increases at higher altitudes. The unions urge members to choose security lines that use standard metal detectors whenever possible. When faced with AIT screening, pilots should opt for enhanced pat-downs, although this security procedure also concerns the unions.
Unions are encouraging pilots to request private pat-downs. USAPA urges members to make sure a witness is present during the procedure. USAPA refers to incidents where Transportation Security Administration officers may have implemented the screening technique inappropriately.
One pilot described his experience as "sexual molestation," according to Cleary's letter. Bates wrote, "There is absolutely no denying that the enhanced pat-down is a demeaning experience." Both unions are looking for long-term solutions to airline crew screening. "Pilots really should never have been subjected to this type of screening, ever. Because when we walk through these machines, within a few hundred yards we get into what potentially could be the biggest weapon on the airport, and that's the airplane," said James Ray, a USAirways captain and spokesman for USAPA.
Pilots are well screened with security background checks and regular medical and mental health checks, he said. The union suggests implementing alternate identity verification technology that would allow pilots to bypass regular passenger screening.
The TSA said it welcomes further discussion with pilots and emphasized the agency's role in addressing security threats. "We are frequently reminded that our enemy is creative and willing to go to great lengths to evade detection. TSA utilizes the latest intelligence to inform the deployment of new technology and procedures in order to stay ahead of evolving threats," the TSA said in a statement.