Concerned about TSA at major stations.

[Saddened]

What will you do when they start checking bus riders?

I don't think they will start checking bus riders - because it wouldn't make any sense to do so. Nor does checking train riders make any sense, so I expect it, eventually, to end.

The reason airport security makes sense is that planes are safe from outside attack once airborne. Hence, if you can keep weapons from getting onto the plane, the plane should be safe. This is not true for trains and buses. Jesse James didn't buy a ticket in order to rob a train, and there is no reason to expect a modern-day terrorist to buy a ticket, or ever board the train or bus, either.

 

[TVRM610]

What will you do when they start checking bus riders?

I don't think they will start checking bus riders - because it wouldn't make any sense to do so. Nor does checking train riders make any sense, so I expect it, eventually, to end.

They already have...



Knoxville Bus

These are the first two i found on Google, I'm sure these are not the only ones.

Now mind you, so far all we have is the same thing we have with Amtrak. Random "VIPR" checks. But it seems reasonable to suspect these checks are testing to see how a permanent TSA presence at Bus and Train Stations (and interstate check points) will work.

 

[Ryan]

John O'Connor has banned TSA from all Amtrak property until a formal agreement can be drawn up.

John O'Connor can say what he wants, the TSA isn't necessarily going to abide by it. Plus, as was mentioned in the thread that discussed this incident, Amtrak owns very few stations nationwide (and Savannah isn't one of them, so even if the TSA were to abide by this pronouncement, it wouldn't have made a bit of difference in that case).

The TSA menace is not for our safety. It is just a part of a bigger plan to control the US population. The people behind this are the Globalists, Financiers, Corporatists and World Bankers.

Wow. Just....wow. It's been a while since I have read such a bitter and utterly baseless statement. You've made it more than obvious that you think every single one of TSA's 55,000+ employees is somehow a "thug," and that you have a significant animosity towards air travel, the TSA, and now apparently bankers too, since they evidently now control the TSA (how do you take yourself seriously with statements like this anyway?). I don't believe these kind of incongruous opinions are at all necessary on a board such as this. Please keep them to yourself.

Actually, he's pretty dead on and I'll thank you to try to keep your efforts to control what other people say to yourself. I may not agree with very much that the guy has to say, but he's certainly just as free to share his (occasionally) misguided opinions as you are. As far as thugs go, you have convicted felons (sometimes even when the airport tries to stop them) stealing from passengers (that's 3 different links there to 3 different situations, btw). As far as the financial side of things, I'm sure that Chertoff pushing for machines built by a company that he has a financial interest in is just a coincidence.

Well, I'm not gonna jump on that bandwagon, but I do think that what DHS is doing is just creating a need for itself, and the need for add'l staff. Because as one of our wise posters pointed out months ago, "employees are power". i.e., The bigger your staff, the more power you have. And if you have an ever increasing staff (even thru contractors) you have ever increasing political power.(not Dem or Rep, but Departmental power)

Precisely.

What will you do when they start checking bus riders?

I don't think they will start checking bus riders - because it wouldn't make any sense to do so. Nor does checking train riders make any sense, so I expect it, eventually, to end.

I remember once having that kind of optimism. Too bad that isn't the case.

 

[amamba]

I hate to bump this topic because I know its been beaten like a dead horse, however, my husband observed two TSA agents today inside the PVD amtrak station on his way to board 66. It is definitely owned by amtrak, although of course the MBTA also runs some trains in and out of the station.

The two agents were wearing full uniforms with TSA clearly marked on them, and they were wearing those nitrile blue gloves that they seem to always wear. They were standing at the top of the escalator that brings folks down to tracks 1 & 2, where the amtrak trains always run. The agents did not seem to be stopping anyone or speaking with anyone, but they were there nonetheless.

And I did see agents in the same garb standing on Canal Street outside of Chicago Union Station just last week. Coincidence? Or does this mark the beginning of selective screening for pax?

 

[TVRM610]

I hate to bump this topic because I know its been beaten like a dead horse,

It's an important topic though, especially since Amtrak "banned" TSA from stations. I'm not surprised that the TSA didn't listen to Amtrak. If the TSA can violate existing state laws of "sexual harassment" why are they going to listen to Amtrak Chief of Police?

 

[Cristobal]

I hate to bump this topic because I know its been beaten like a dead horse,

It's an important topic though, especially since Amtrak "banned" TSA from stations. I'm not surprised that the TSA didn't listen to Amtrak. If the TSA can violate existing state laws of "sexual harassment" why are they going to listen to Amtrak Chief of Police?

Can you cite that please?

DHS trumps Amtrak Chief of Police any day of the week. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. Maybe your congressman can change that (or not).

I also think that you have the whole VIPR thing bass-ackwards. But that doesn't surprise me coming from someone that is likely using MSM and/or anecdotal blog accounts as their primary source of info.

 

[Ryan]

I'd love to hear your explanation of how we have the whole VIPR thing wrong, considering that eyewitness accounts directly contradict the claims made by Blogger Bob.

 

[Cristobal]

I'd love to hear your explanation of how we have the whole VIPR thing wrong, considering that eyewitness accounts directly contradict the claims made by Blogger Bob.

I didn't say "wrong". I said bass-ackwards. That was in response to this post:

What will you do when they start checking bus riders?

I don't think they will start checking bus riders - because it wouldn't make any sense to do so. Nor does checking train riders make any sense, so I expect it, eventually, to end.

They already have...

What part of Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response makes you think that they are "testing for permanent presence" and not just doing as planned and showing (possible terrorists) that they could possibly show up anywhere and anytime?

I'm not saying that I agree completely lock-step with everything that DHS/TSA is doing but I do get tired of all the misinformation that is out there.

 

[MattW]

Perhaps it's all the lies about "this won't be that big" before becoming a big thing. Like how the insta-porn machines wouldn't become primary screening and only used to clear metal detector anomalies, but many people are now being forced to choose between exposure to ionizing radiation and porn being made of themselves, or a sexual assault by a clown-school reject. Or how the pat-downs would only be used to clear anomalies, but it has been confirmed that the metal detectors randomly select people for a pat-down. Or how the liquids carnival was "temporary." Or how the shoe-removal was "temporary." Or how said insta-porn machines weren't that revealing. And those are just the examples I can think of right off the bat. Nappy's little regime has given us no reason to trust them or take anything they say at face-value.

 

[Trainmans daughter]

Well, maybe bomb-sniffing dogs would be more effective than any number of airport-type "gropers". This evening, all trains scheduled to pass through Emeryville and Jack London Oakland have been suspended due to this:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/03/29/oakland-amtrak-train-station-evacuated-during-bomb-threat/

 

[Tumbleweed]

Well, maybe bomb-sniffing dogs would be more effective than any number of airport-type "gropers". This evening, all trains scheduled to pass through Emeryville and Jack London Oakland have been suspended due to this:

http://sanfrancisco....ng-bomb-threat/

I am a firm believer that trained dogs would be much more effective (and cheaper) than the procedures now in place at airports....

 

[TVRM610]

I'd love to hear your explanation of how we have the whole VIPR thing wrong, considering that eyewitness accounts directly contradict the claims made by Blogger Bob.

I didn't say "wrong". I said bass-ackwards. That was in response to this post:

What will you do when they start checking bus riders?

I don't think they will start checking bus riders - because it wouldn't make any sense to do so. Nor does checking train riders make any sense, so I expect it, eventually, to end.

They already have...

What in the world is your point? I said it "seems reasonable to suspect" I did not say "they will be setting up permanent shop soon." I understand what VIPR is. I am the one that pointed out in my own post that you quoted that every day TSA screening was not being done, only VIPR checks.

I said it seems reasonable to suspect that VIPR checks are tests to see how a permanent set-up would work. I think that statement is 100% true. I'm not saying they are, I am saying it is reasonable to suspect that they could be.

 

[TVRM610]

I hate to bump this topic because I know its been beaten like a dead horse,

It's an important topic though, especially since Amtrak "banned" TSA from stations. I'm not surprised that the TSA didn't listen to Amtrak. If the TSA can violate existing state laws of "sexual harassment" why are they going to listen to Amtrak Chief of Police?

Can you cite that please?

DHS trumps Amtrak Chief of Police any day of the week. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. Maybe your congressman can change that (or not).

I also think that you have the whole VIPR thing bass-ackwards. But that doesn't surprise me coming from someone that is likely using MSM and/or anecdotal blog accounts as their primary source of info.

Thanks for the personal attack . I try my best to double check facts vs. Fiction that I read online. I'm quite certain I don't always get it right.

The citations you asked for... I'm not going to list the laws of every state. What the TSA is doing is sexual assault under the laws of every state I know of. Without cause, a law enforcement official can not touch the sexual organs of anyone. I would like to ask you to please cite one law that permits the groping of a citizen without just cause. In fact, please explain to me how the TSA enhanced pat down is NOT sexual assault. And I mean that seriously, if you don't think it is, please tell me why.

 

[TN Tin Man]

The citations you asked for... I'm not going to list the laws of every state. What the TSA is doing is sexual assault under the laws of every state I know of. Without cause, a law enforcement official can not touch the sexual organs of anyone. I would like to ask you to please cite one law that permits the groping of a citizen without just cause. In fact, please explain to me how the TSA enhanced pat down is NOT sexual assault. And I mean that seriously, if you don't think it is, please tell me why.

Your points are valid. The act of conducting a search to the extent the TSA performs them would meet the definition of sexual assault in most states. But, there is a second point to most of the assault laws. That is intent. Was the touch or assault conducted with criminal intent. In the case of the TSA that would be very hard to prove in court.

 

[Ryan]

I said it seems reasonable to suspect that VIPR checks are tests to see how a permanent set-up would work. I think that statement is 100% true. I'm not saying they are, I am saying it is reasonable to suspect that they could be.

I agree that this is 100% reasonable. Hopefully the angry backlash gives them a little bit of pause.

Your points are valid. The act of conducting a search to the extent the TSA performs them would meet the definition of sexual assault in most states. But, there is a second point to most of the assault laws. That is intent. Was the touch or assault conducted with criminal intent. In the case of the TSA that would be very hard to prove in court.

They're sure as hell not welcome or invited touches!

 

[TVRM610]

Your points are valid. The act of conducting a search to the extent the TSA performs them would meet the definition of sexual assault in most states. But, there is a second point to most of the assault laws. That is intent. Was the touch or assault conducted with criminal intent. In the case of the TSA that would be very hard to prove in court.

They're sure as hell not welcome or invited touches!

Haha... Ryan.. that made me laugh out loud! I do understand Tin Mans point and agree there is not "intent" of sexual assault. I also recognize that what the TSA is doing is technically legal under federal law.

But I just got a great idea! If the TSA is not going to change the search policy, how about they start hiring extremely attractive officers? And maybe get a fashion designer to come up with something a little bit more sexy than a baggy blue jumpsuit. Hey.. if this was done right, people would be lining up at the airport in HOPES they get a screening!

Even though I say this as a joke, you gotta admit, if done right the whole "advanced pat down" thing could be kinda fun.

 

[Peter KG6LSE]

This some thing I don't bring up often .

As some one who was Sexually assaulted when young . I can t really do Airports anymore .

I had a non enhanced patdown 3 years ago and had a relapse to the point for a entire week I could not leave My bed .

THIS is trauma . this is not solving anything .

I have told Ever person I can get ahold off In DC that We need to stop this crap.

Get MM wave NOT XRAY based scaners and Il be happy .

and make a college degree the minumin for ANY TSA job ....

the system can work If we do some simple changes ..

Peter

 

[Ryan]

and make a college degree the minumin for ANY TSA job ....

I'd settle for HS degree or GED at this point!

 

[Peter KG6LSE]

this is ture ryan ,

See My beef is this ..

My MD did years of training to SEE me nude .AKA he gained the moral right .

but Mr blue gloves is not a PHD or a MD or a nurse wnhat no.

See the operators who do this stuff need to be Sueable and held acountble and have Profeessonal training . not a 10 Min PPT file .

the AMTK police are more welcome to me then any TSA I have ever met with one exception and that was a agent I knew at ONT as his dad was my teacher in college

Peter

 

[MrFSS]

I don't fly much any more since I'm retired and have never experienced being patted down.

Before they start the process do they ask your permission to pat you down? I guess if they do and you say no you wouldn't be granted access to the flight.

In other words if you are consenting to a pat down then I wouldn't think you wouldn't have any right to complain about it.

 

[Ryan]

Is it really consent when you don't really have a choice to say no?

 

[PerRock]

I don't fly much any more since I'm retired and have never experienced being patted down.

Before they start the process do they ask your permission to pat you down? I guess if they do and you say no you wouldn't be granted access to the flight.

In other words if you are consenting to a pat down then I wouldn't think you wouldn't have any right to complain about it.

last news report I heard (and I don't fly much either) you are given the option of the enhanced scanner which takes pictures of you nude, or an enhanced pat down, refusal to both led to being arrested.

peter

 

[MrFSS]

I don't fly much any more since I'm retired and have never experienced being patted down.

Before they start the process do they ask your permission to pat you down? I guess if they do and you say no you wouldn't be granted access to the flight.

In other words if you are consenting to a pat down then I wouldn't think you wouldn't have any right to complain about it.

last news report I heard (and I don't fly much either) you are given the option of the enhanced scanner which takes pictures of you nude, or an enhanced pat down, refusal to both led to being arrested.

peter

Arrested? Or, just not allowed access to the secure boarding areas?

 

[PRR 60]

I don't fly much any more since I'm retired and have never experienced being patted down.

Before they start the process do they ask your permission to pat you down? I guess if they do and you say no you wouldn't be granted access to the flight.

In other words if you are consenting to a pat down then I wouldn't think you wouldn't have any right to complain about it.

last news report I heard (and I don't fly much either) you are given the option of the enhanced scanner which takes pictures of you nude, or an enhanced pat down, refusal to both led to being arrested.

peter

Refusal leads to not flying, not arrest. Arrest would occur if you refuse and then make a stink about it by disrupting the security area and then disobeying law enforcement orders to leave. Just refusing the screening will not get you arrested.

Best advise: if you don't want to be scanned and you don't want the pat down, don't fly. It is really that simple.

 

[Ryan]

Refusal leads to not flying, not arrest. Arrest would occur if you refuse and then make a stink about it by disrupting the security area and then disobeying law enforcement orders to leave. Just refusing the screening will not get you arrested.

The TSA claims otherwise.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-11-20/business/sfl-airport-scans-pat-downs-refual-20101121_1_tsa-airport-checkpoint-sari-koshetz

Best advise: if you don't want to be scanned and you don't want the pat down, don't fly. It is really that simple.

That's great if not flying is an option for you. For many, it's a job requirement. In today's economic environment, "just quit" or "don't take a job that requires it" really isn't an option either.