TSA Unlawfully Detains and Questions Two Friends


PDA






Jayman
December 19, 2003, 03:14 PM
Apologies for the length. This happend to two friends, I wish I were making it up.

I am angry! I am angry that things like this can happen to friends of mine and people will say, "Oh it's OK because we're safer." Bull ****!

Our government is getting out of control Ladies and Gentlemen. Whether you believe it or not, our rights are being trampled, raped, and **** upon by this government.

These are true stories told first-hand by the people it happened to. I know both of these people personally and they are both Patriots and outstanding Citizens as far as I'm concerned. These are stories of Rights being trampled on, unprofessional conduct towards a lady by Airport Police and FBI agents and other atrocities.

Since this is sort of long it will be posted in two replies to this post. One story is told by John who is Kit's boyfriend, and the other is told by Kit herself.

John's story - http://www.livejournal.com/users/abz6598/312060.html


Airport follies
A few of you on LJ know about this, and were asked to keep quiet about it until it was resolved. For the most part, it was resolved yesterday and since the 'hostages' have been released, I can comment on it without too much worry of blowback. So, clicky-clicky for the amazing and expensive story about how, after Shooty Goodness in September, I was arrested by the Dulles Airport cops, interviewed by ATF, FBI and Fatherland Security, handcuffed in front of the crowd at the check-in counter, had $3000 of guns confiscated and was accused of being a Neo-Nazi and white supremacist.

Now, you may not be aware of it, but it is legal to take guns onto airplanes. Really. The requirement is that they be in a gun case, unloaded, locked, and declared to the check-in clerk, who will give you a form to sign, as checked baggage. I've been travelling with guns this way for over fifteen years. Never a problem. Until Sept.

One gun case contained four pistols and an AR-15. One smaller case contained a .38 revolver. I got up to the counter and said the exact same phrase I've uttered every time I fly - "I need to declare unloaded firearms". The clerk gives me a bright orange tag to fill out (the declaration tag) stating that I certify the guns are unloaded. Since I have two gun cases I tell him "I need two". He gives me another tag. I dutifully fill out both and put one in each gun case, as required by law.

SO I lock up the cases, hand em over to the clerk and they go on the conveyor belt to the TSA goons and their x-ray machine. I go through security to my gate and wait for the plane. Fifteen minutes before my plane boards I get paged and asked to return to the check-in counter. I get there to no less than four airport cops, three guys in suits with walkietalkies and three or four white shirted TSA goons. I am told that the x-ray machines picked up a cylindrical metal object in my luggage and that they'd like the keys so they can open it and check it out. (The cylindrical object was my telescoping ASP baton.) They open the gun case and things get busy. All sorts of people are called over. After fifteen minutes I am handcuffed "For my protection" in front of the assembled crowd waiting to check in for their flight. I stand there for about a half hour as they try to determine if theres something wrong. I turn to one of the cops and say "Lemme guess, if I'm innocent then I have nothing to fear, right?" She agrees. Im sure she's being fitted for jackboots as we speak.

Now one goon comes up to me and says im under arrest for improperly checking in my guns. ***? Theres a declaration tag sitting right there in the case with the guns. My legal obligation is met! They take me outside and remove my glasses, shoes, belt and stand me against the wall and search me. Outside the terminal are three marked cars, a cop with a dog, and a couple supervisors.

Still handcuffed, Im put in the back seat of a car for about a half hour as my fate is discussed. Finally im driven to the cop shop and put into a cage, still handcuffed. After about an hour or so, a couple suits from the FBI, ATF and Fatherland Security show up and take me to a room to ask questions. Having gone through my luggage, they found a t-shirt with what could have been considered a Nazi slogan on it ("Das Reich"..the shirt was left at kitiara's by one of the Shooty Goodness people when he changed clothes to go to dinner. Then there were the books...Small Arms Infantry Tactics, Counter Insurgency manual, etc, etc. Are you in the militia? Are you a white supremacist? (Asked by the Aryan, blonde haired, blue eyed FBI dweeb) Why do you have all these guns? Where did you get them? Do you own other guns? Do you own body armour? If you knew someone was going to commit a crime you'd tell us right? Etc, etc.

Back into the cage, and handcuffs, for another few hours. Finally, around 10pm, the let me go after taking all my guns and other weapons. Im charged with 'bringing a dangerous article onto airport property'. Huh? The guns were all in a locked case, as required.

Hire a lawyer. $900 "Start to finish" is the quoted price. Apparently 'start to finish' doesnt include $500 to file a motion to get a Bill Of Particulars from the prosecutor, who was dragging her feet in getting that info to us. After all, how the hell can I defend myself if I dont know what they have a problem with? There were five guns in one gun case and they said the AR-15 was the dangerous article. Why they picked that one out of the five in there seems wierd...after all, if there were five guns in there wouldnt each one be just as dangerous? (And, no, there was no 'assault weapon' ban that affected any of this..it was a post-ban gun). So the court date was yesterday. I show up in my Going To Court suit. Docket lists 49 cases... Lawyer arrives. So we get into the courtroom. Judge asks if tehres any changes. Prosecutorgirl says the state of VA chooses not to pursue charges at this time for lack of evidence. Im free to go. Great. Now where the hell are my guns? I was thinking my toys had been turned over to the tender mercies of ATF for 'testing'. I was told I could go to the airport copshop and get them back. So, later that afternoon, kitiara (who was very supportive, very outraged, and very understanding of the whole mess) gave me a ride to the copshop. I went in , showed idea, and me and the proprty clerk inventoried my toys...AR-15, Browning P35, 1911 45, S&W .38, S&W .357, Glock 9mm, butterfly knife, etc, etc. The property clerk and the other cop did NOT seem happy to let me have my toys back. Probably the kind of cops that think only they should have guns. So I sign the forms and get my toys back. The property clerk walks them to the parking lot and puts them in the truck. He then stands there as if expecting me to thank him for carrying them..fat chance. We leave.

Now, how to get them back to MT? Well, feeling boldened and a little bit confident that the airport cops realize they might have screwed the pooch, I figure I'll check 'em in the same as last time but paying much, much more attention to every step. I filled out a declaration tag for EACH gun (overkill, yes) and followed them as they x-rayed the bags. No problems. I didnt relax until the plane was actually airborne and I didnt fully feel safe until I was on the ground in Missoula with my cases in hand.

$1500 in lawyer fees, $500 in airfare, another $1000 in lost time from work.

And it isnt over. TSA wants to fine me $1200 for failure to declare firearms...but if I dont contest it, they'll cut the fine to $600. I asked the attorney if he thought that maybe the TSA will see that VA didnt have a leg to stand on and maybe wash their hands of it too. We'll see.

The reason I havent said anything was because until I got my guns back, I didnt want to make any waves. If some well-meaning person started asking questions or rallying public opinion or something like that it would have , in my opinion, just made things more difficult. But, now that my guns are safely with me, it doesnt have to be a secret anymore.

Needless to say, I wasnt a big fan of airport security before and Im far less a fan of them now.



See Part 2 Below

If you enjoyed reading about "TSA Unlawfully Detains and Questions Two Friends" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Jayman
December 19, 2003, 03:16 PM
Part 2

Kit's Story - http://www.livejournal.com/users/kitiara/1069338.html


What was I thinking, reading Stephen King at the airport!
What a completely surreal evening I had last night. As I'd mentioned, I reluctantly dropped John off at the airport around 4pm or so. I went with him to the baggage counter and waited while he filled out the paperwork to declare his firearms, walked with him to the security line, and kissed him goodbye. I thought I might need some distraction, so I had agreed to meet some friends for dinner at 7pm. I went home, changed, and then headed to the restaurant. Just as I pulled into the parking lot, my cell phone rang.

I said hello, and a polite stranger asked if I was [my name], identified himself as a police officer, then asked if I was safe and okay. My forehead wrinkled, and I said I was. The officer then asked if I knew John, and whether he had (a) been staying with me this past week and (b) brought firearms with him for the purpose of shooting at the local range. I said yes to both, and jumped to the conclusion that John must've not cleared each and every gun - I know I'm obsessive about checking mine when I travel - it wouldn't be unreasonable for him to have left one magazine in when dealing with the number of guns he brought with him. So the officer then asked if I'd mind coming to the airport to talk to him.

I left messages with my dinner companions and pulled into the drab police building at Dulles airport about 20 minutes later.

First it was very odd - they wouldn't even tell me that John was there. I had to ask for the officer who'd called me *by name* and say why I was there, and then state my "relationship" to John. It was only then that they even admitted they had him. The officer who'd called me came out and introduced himself, then introduced me to two FBI agents who asked if I wouldn't mind talking to them about John. One was named Joel - clean-cut broad-shouldered all-American looking guy. The other one, Tim, was tall, pale, and lanky with a blonde crew cut and blue eyes. Both seemed pretty young - couldn't have been out of their early thirties if that. Like the officer before them, they were extremely polite.

They told me that John was in a little trouble. They dodged my questions at first, and then said he had brought a firearm with him that he had not declared. The way in which they said it implied that he had a gun I hadn't seen, that it was loaded, and that it was on his person. They didn't outright say any of those things - but they very adroitly led me right to that conclusion. Then they started asking me questions. Who was I, how did I meet John, what were our political views, did we "meet with others who might have similar political views" on his visit... lots of things that were clearly leading right to the idea that he was some sort of milita nut who was here on a recruiting mission or some such.

They started out treating me like some poor stupid femme who'd been unknowingly lured into some sort of illicit affair with a Very Dangerous Fellow. On top of that, both were extremely flirty. They seemed to think that I didn't know John had any guns with him. When I said I did, they wanted to know how many and what types. Then whether I knew that he had "illegal high capacity magazines with him." I said that so far as I knew, all of his high-cap mags were pre-ban and thus not illegal. They asked if I knew he'd made "modifications" to his guns. I said sure, he'd put a new trigger in his Glock while he was here. Stupid, stupid questions calculated to make me think he was some sort of maniac.

Then they moved on and asked me if I knew what kind of "literature" he had with him. This really irked me. I was under the impression that there were no banned books in America, and one can read whatever the hell one pleases. On top of that, they said "he has a Das Reich t-shirt with him - is he a white supremacist?" To paraphrase Darling John, "does he *look* white to you?" I explained that a friend had left the shirt at my house while changing for dinner, and that John had taken it with him so that he could mail it back to said friend with some thank you gifts. And John approached this better than I did - the shirt was not his size.

White supremacists. Hmph. My gun instructor is black. Hell, the guy who owns the range we frequent is black. John himself is half-puerto rican. The gentleman to whom the 'Das Reich' shirt belonged is married to a Lebanese belly dancer.

Anyhow.

They started asking about me. Did I shoot, when did I pick up the hobby and why, did my father know that a man from Montana carrying firearms was visiting me. Why wasn't my father worried for my safety. HAH! Like I'm some poor defenseless doormat. I explained that my father raised me in such a way that he didn't *have* to worry about me.

Then the kicker. The "this is really supposed to shock you" question: "are you aware that he had two pairs of handcuffs in his luggage?" I said I was. Then they said "why would he be travelling with those? At which point I said, "are you sure you want me to answer that question?" They said yes, and I said "Some people *like* that sort of thing."

They both blushed. And quickly moved on. There were other strange things, like "your friend could be in a lot of trouble, yet you seem very calm, why is that?" and "did he meet anyone when he was not with you, unbeknownst to you?" (duh, if I don't *know* about it how can I answer that question?" and "would you be willing to take a lie detector test?"

Overall it was surreal, like I said. It was like something out of a television show - guy from Montana, travelling with guns (gee, there's a shocker), he MUST be a terrorist! The one thing they kept saying over and over was "tell us about John, anything you can think of." I'd say "what specifically do you want to know?" and they'd just shrug and say "anything." I refused to do that, beyond noting his fondness for Krispy Kreme donuts. After about 45 minutes they ran out of things to ask me and told me they were about to interview John, and that I could wait in the lobby.

The lobby was like an ice chest, so I gave the officers at the desk my number and went to get some coffee. Figuring I'd be waiting awhile, I also grabbed a copy of Stephen King's The Gunslinger. I'd tried reading The Drawing of the Three once and hated it, but my friends have been raving about the revised edition so I thought I'd give it a shot. I'm sitting back in the police lobby reading and sipping my Latte, and Tim The Friendly FBI Agent comes out and says "you know, what are we supposed to think when we see you reading books like that?" He wasn't kidding.

WHAT THE @#%!???

Since when is it "suspicious" in this country to read ****ing Stephen King? It wasn't "Blowing Up Airports 101." It wasn't even nonfiction for goodness sake. At this point, I asked Tim for a business card. He said he didn't have any, but I was welcome to his phone number, and winked at me. Guess he likes handcuffs too.

While I waited in the lobby, several other police officers came out to talk to me, just casually. Said they'd heard I liked shooting and wanted to hear about what kinds of guns I had, that sort of thing. Each and every one was flirtacious as all get out, even the ones old enough to be my dad. I overheard one of them say to his friend as he was walking away, "she's really something." *rolls eyes* Lecherous bastards.

When they finally released John, around 10pm (remember, I'd gotten the call at 7, and he had to have been there since about 5), the officer who came out to tell me they were releasing him said to me, very pointedly "you might want to be rethink your lifestyle choices, and maybe think twice before travelling with your firearms."

Again - what the ****? It's not *illegal*, there are *rules* and John *followed* those rules. Where does this moron get off telling me to watch my "lifestyle"?

atk
December 19, 2003, 03:43 PM
Interesting reading. Do you have any sources that support what happened? Is the court case information available? Is the arrest record available?

pax
December 19, 2003, 03:44 PM
There's so much wrong with that story I don't even know where to start.

The thing that really chaps my hide about such tales is that 98% of the folks who read them are going to discount the entire thing. "You don't know these people, they probably had it coming to them." "You're paranoid to worry about this." "The police were only doing their jobs." "You aren't on the side of the terrorists, are you??"

Never mind. Go back to sleep. It can't happen here.

pax

Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for the one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. ...So you wait, and you wait. But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. ... And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self deception has grown too heavy .... You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven't done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we do nothing). -- Milton Mayer, writing about Nazi Germany in They Thought They Were Free

Jayman
December 19, 2003, 03:58 PM
ATK: I personally know the woman, Kit. We've been friends for MONTHS. She's a great person. I don't know her boyfriend as well, but he's a good guy. So your only source for this right now is ME. (I know, internet and all.) I don't know if there's court case info available or arrest record. I don't know if the two individuals involved want their full names publicized.

pax
December 19, 2003, 04:05 PM
atk, good questions. I'd be inclined to want to hunt up the paperwork too, if the story itself really didn't have the ring of truth that it does -- and if we hadn't been hearing similar tales from other sources for quite awhile now. I don't see any reason to think this one's made up out of whole cloth, given the multiplicity of other such tales.

pax

Falsehoods not only disagree with truths, but usually quarrel among themselves. -- Daniel Webster

Sunray
December 19, 2003, 04:24 PM
"...TSA..." Who? Only the government can levy fines. Why are you an the lawyer not suing the airport, this TSA, the cops etc, etc? Mind you, both these accounts read like dime novels. English Comp assignments at the very least. Have they written anything else?
Why would this guy be carrying the hardware? Just curious.

Jayman
December 19, 2003, 04:37 PM
Sunray: regarding them not getting a lawyer and suing like crazy, I don't know. If it were me, they'd already be feeling the hot hot heat of an enraged lawyer or five.

The guy brought all that hardware to go shooting with his girlfriend, who is also a shooter. She's a relative beginner, so he was bringing along a bunch of stuff for her to play with. Does it matter WHY he had them, so long as he was adhering to all laws and regs concerning them?

I don't understand your commentary regarding writing style or why it is pertinent. Both write journals on the web, which you can see if you follow the links back.

atk
December 19, 2003, 04:37 PM
Jayman: Yeah, you see exactly my point - the Internet and all.

pax: Oh - I agree with you completely. We have been hearing a lot about this, lately. It doesn't seem to have any self-contradicting information. But I haven't seen any evidence, beyond someone I don't know describing some incident that happened to their friend. I can't help but want to confirm... anything. That the arrest really took place; that the court proceedings really occurred; anything. I don't discount it, I'm just not simply accepting it, either - maybe I'm getting cynical...

JohnBT
December 19, 2003, 04:41 PM
So the problem was he did not declare the individual guns in the one bag?

I'm assuming this because he listed the guns individually the second time around - "I filled out a declaration tag for EACH gun...".

The tsa.gov/public site says:

"The firearm must be declared orally or in writing in accordance with the air carriers procedures (contact your air carrier for their specific procedures)."


I guess it makes sense that they'd want to know exactly which guns are in the bag and not just that the bag contains guns.

John

Jayman
December 19, 2003, 04:45 PM
Actually the first go-round had all of the guns listed on the declaration sheet for each case. i.e. Case 1: Glock, .38, .357. The second time around he filled out a separate sheet for EACH gun, which is not required, according to the regs.

simon
December 19, 2003, 04:45 PM
Why would this guy be carrying the hardware? Just curious.

UHh,because he wanted to shoot w/friends at a local range.Did you read a different story?

Waitone
December 19, 2003, 05:46 PM
Lemme see here.

Montana, neo-nazi garb, dangerous literature, paramilitary equipment (cuffs and baton), "alternative" lifestyle, know-it-all attitude.

Point of fact question. Were either of you baldheaded? Body piercings? **Gakk** tattoos?

Just off hand I'd say you were profiled. Naw, can't be. We don't profile middle easterners so why would be profile Honkey-Americans?

If it were my call, I'd place a call to the NRA's legal stable and get the wheels moving on an affadavit. They may be interested.

Derek Zeanah
December 19, 2003, 05:50 PM
Feel free to invite them to hang out here. :)

rock jock
December 19, 2003, 06:14 PM
Before we all jump to conclusions and spout a bunch of rhetoric, it is important to find out the facts.
Actually the first go-round had all of the guns listed on the declaration sheet for each case
If this is indeed the case, then he complied with the law. Your friend needs to find a lawyer who will work on contingency and sue. It is that simple. The lawyer will find out what happened. If things happened exactly as they describe, it sounds like they will have a case. If they don't sue, they should be ashamed of themselves for getting kicked in the seat and taking it without a whimper.

We have been hearing a lot about this, lately.
Really, because I haven't. In fact, I have heard the exact opposite, that checking in guns has been going as smoothly as it ever did. Now, what I have heard is a bunch of folks who have an unfavorable opinion of the TSA (often justified) willing to accept any damning story without verification.

Standing Wolf
December 19, 2003, 06:55 PM
We've got Saddam Hussein. Norman Mineta is still at large.

standingbear
December 19, 2003, 07:01 PM
precisly why I nor any of my family will take a plane anywhere.Too much hassle and too many stories.Some officials are very good at asking "loaded questions" to create something illegal that is not illegal or to twist the truth into something that could make the pope look guilty.these guys and gals are a stickler for details.

simon
December 19, 2003, 07:46 PM
Then one must, when flying w/guns,carry a voice activated recorder!Don't let them twist anyfrickin' thing,prove what was said and throw it their faces in COURT!

carpettbaggerr
December 19, 2003, 08:04 PM
1. Are ASP batons legal in VA?
2. Are handcuffs legal for non LEO to possess in VA?
3. Why no lawsuit?

Seems like a lawsuit is in order, at least to recover the legal fees. If not punative damages for false arrest and false imprisonment. If you didn't have any illegal hardware, they had no grounds for arrest. At most, they should have questioned him, without removing him from the airport.

swifter
December 19, 2003, 09:16 PM
:uhoh: Exactly why I'll not fly unless I abso:cuss: lutely have to.
Not flying itself, but the convenience of that mode of transportation is a poor trade for the "airport experience" and the "cattle-car" seating.:neener: Main reason I bought a Lexus...:D

Tom

BTR
December 19, 2003, 09:21 PM
Not all of them are bad. Today I asked a TSA employee some questions about flying with ammunition, and he told me he is an NRA member, who owns an AK...

oldfart
December 19, 2003, 10:37 PM
Every time I've gone to court for jury duty, the defence attorney asks us if we have any pre-determined ideas about the defendant. Usually, the question goes something like " Do you believe that where' there's smoke, ther's fire?" Of course, I'm supposed to say "Oh no sir!!" then hang him.

But with the TSA there's enough smoke to hide a forest fire, so I truly believe there's at least a decent campfire going. There are so many stories about mis-managed authority in the airports that there has to be some sort of fire.

A slightly different case came up at Portland International Airport last year. A writer for some movie outfit was traveling back to LA with his pregnant wife. He took exception to the way the male TSA agents handled his wife and spoke up about it. He spent a night in the local jail and eventually had to pay a fine. Some people who heard the story didn't completely believe it so I volunteered to check it out. As I dug deeper into the court and arrest records and after speaking to a witness, I decided that he had actually understated his experience.

These are not unusual cases. Most of the victims are so shaken by the experience that they are simply afraid to complain. The government agents they deal with generally make sure to leave a lasting impression too.

I can't help thinking that Henry Bowman would have placed TSA agents right alongside the ATF.

GigaBuist
December 19, 2003, 11:18 PM
Couple of comments...

Regarding the above said story I beleive Oleg Volk himself linked to it in another very recent thread with the commnet "here's what recently happened to my friends."

if you scan Oleg's posts over the past 4 days from the time of this writing you'll find it. I may be mistaken though: I had just gotten out of an Airport and my mind was -fried- from an entire day of living in fear.

The TSA is weird. If you want to find another group of people that are pretty ticked off at the TSA you have to look no further than skydivers. They are often hassled for trying to bring a -parachute- onto a plane! That's where the friggen device belongs but TSA employees have been hassling them since 9/11 over the matter.

Now, many of you may wonder why they wouldn't just check their chute and turn it into a non issue. The answer is simple: They trust their life to that thing working properly and you don't want a TSA "goon" pulling it apart and stuffing it back into a bag. Would you let a TSA agent tear apart your AR-15, put it back together, and then shoot it without you inspecting it? Hopefully not.

With that aside I'm going to step on my soapbox and preach to the choir here. Nobody is actually safe behind the security checks in the airport. The TSA is in the uber-paranoid state where nobody can have anything resembling a knife of stabbing device beyond their area, but they aren't doing diddly to enforce that.

I can go to a snack shop behind the secure gates and purchase a 22oz glass bottle. That'll make a handy weapon if you break it. Bring some paracord/550 along and you can bust the bottle, be a nice guy and pick it up, then take a large piece into a bathroom stall in your pocket, wrap it in 550, and make a crude knife.

There are an "alarming" number of things that can be made into a short range cutting weapon behind those secure gates. The vast majority of people don't see it though: THR members probably do though. Oh, and the bad people. So, the only two groups that really notice how you can make a weapon are the really bad and the really good.

Sheer logic dictates that if both the good man and the bad man can make a weapon behind secured gates that there's no point in the exercise. Only the bad man would actually make a weapon beyond those points, unless the good man had to fashion one quickly to save lives.

I went over this in more detail in my web-log (blog) earlier this week and had an anti comment to me via email that they weren't feeling so safe now at the airport. It's all at http://justinbuist.blogspot.com if you want to read it.

JohnBT
December 19, 2003, 11:45 PM
Jayman - Thanks for the details on how the guns were listed. I wonder what the TSA's problem was. John

Tamara
December 19, 2003, 11:48 PM
I wonder what the TSA's problem was.

It may have been those Help Wanted ads that started out: "Welfare payments not keeping you in PS2 games? Got a pulse? Can you fog a mirror? Have you always wanted a badge of your very own? Have we got a career track for you!" ;)

Tim McBride
December 20, 2003, 12:10 AM
I thought Pistols and Rifles had to be in different cases? The TSA made my father do this when he flew back home from Arizona. Thats the only rule I know of that *MAY* have been broken. Hardly a reason to give this guy that much ????. Nice fat lawsuit hopefully!

Billmanweh
December 20, 2003, 12:38 AM
If I thought they would be read, I'd buy everyone I know a copy of Unintended Consequences for Christmas...

the fact that 99% of people aren't bothered by stuff like this absolutely makes my blood boil

When Hitler attacked the Jews I was not a Jew, therefore I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the Catholics, I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialists, I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned. Then Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church — and there was nobody left to be concerned.

I guess there's something to that, after all

Travis McGee
December 20, 2003, 01:16 AM
It's a good thing he didn't have THIS book in his luggage.

http://www.tomeaker.com/FReepers/reader1.jpg

4v50 Gary
December 20, 2003, 01:47 AM
I've met some pretty dim witted TSA folks myself. Privitize them and fire Mineta.

c_yeager
December 20, 2003, 02:22 AM
To be honest i didnt even think that there were LEGAL restrictions on transporting firearms in the cargo section of an aircraft. I mean each airline has their procedures but, i didnt really think that TSA was even involved in that process. I honestly dont see what buisiness it is of theirs in the first place. You can access the cargo area from the cabin so there isnt a hijacking risk or anything like that. The whole thing seems odd.

artherd
December 20, 2003, 02:51 AM
Did they read him his rights? How was the arrest conducted? What was he being charged with that justified the arrest?


Any compentent lawyer should be able to tear this a new one, and seek punatitive damages for harassment of both parties.

There may even be grounds for a criminal case in regards to civil rights being violated, false arrest, etc.

Jayman
December 20, 2003, 03:15 AM
Quote from GigaBuist
Regarding the above said story I beleive Oleg Volk himself linked to it in another very recent thread with the commnet "here's what recently happened to my friends."

if you scan Oleg's posts over the past 4 days from the time of this writing you'll find it. I may be mistaken though: I had just gotten out of an Airport and my mind was -fried- from an entire day of living in fear.

I completely spaced on the fact that Oleg knows Kit, I don't know if he knows John or not.

I'm seriously not pulling anyone's leg here, none of this was fabricated.

PATH
December 20, 2003, 03:36 AM
Stuff like this makes your blood boil! It is truly amazing that the inmates are running the asylum! Say nothing and get a lawyer because your friendly neighborhood government types are on a fishing expedition. Don't answer! Get a LAWYER! You have to watch that they don't try and pin the Lindburgh kidnapping on you!

Let them establish pedigree and then ask for an attorney! SAY NOTHING TO ANYONE!!! What you say can and will be used against you in a court of law even if you say something innocently!

Past belief that this kind of crap is going on! God help us all!:fire: :cuss:

TallPine
December 20, 2003, 10:48 AM
I don't understand why anyone would want to leave Montana .... ;)

Chris Rhines
December 20, 2003, 10:49 AM
I love this:
If you knew someone was going to commit a crime you'd tell us right?Oh yeah, after getting treated like this, I'm really gonna go out of my way to help the police. Dimwits...

- Chris

Tim McBride
December 20, 2003, 11:54 AM
Speaking of flying with "Enemies Foreign And Domestic"...I had bought the book right before a flight to oakland to visit family. In Phoenix nothing was said or even a second look. In Oakland on the other hand the security people gave me some serious looks......I found the whole thing humorous.

Oleg Volk
December 20, 2003, 01:39 PM
Oleg knows Kit, I don't know if he knows John or not.
I know and respect both. Kit added a lot of info privately which served to make me more paranoid that I've been in a while and also indicated that we are dealing with very scummy uniformed Gollums. Will see how today's trip to the airport will go.

tetleyb
December 20, 2003, 06:02 PM
Very interesting...My wife just flew to Maine. She checked her Sig P220 in her luggage and 6 fully loaded magazines (the handgun was unloaded) and DID NOT declare it. About an hour later, she was paged to meet with airport police (San Francisco Airport Police) and the TSA. She did as requested.

After some questioning, etc the TSA confiscated the ammunition, made her put declare the handgun, however allowed the handgun to be checked in. However, she was not treated rudely or badly. Not handcuffed, etc. Although, there were 3 police officers there.

Now, my wife is a fully sworn police officer in California and she did show her ID and badge. However, PRIOR to that, they had no way of knowing who/what she was. She didn't thing it was that big of a deal.

Although she did have to buy more ammo when she got to Maine. When she came home, she had to put the ammunition in its original box. Otherwise, she could not have checked it.

In November, 2001, right after 9/11 I went to Blackwater Lodge. Took their Advanced Pistol Course. I had no problem getting out of Oakland, none whatsover. I checked TWO handguns, and 1,000 rounds of ammunition (I shipped another 2,000 rounds there prior).

However, when I came back, through Norfolk VA, I ran into all kinds of problems. I was jammed up by the security and police. This, after me even showing I was a police officer. I didn't receive any special treatment at all. I wasn't handcuffed, however I was stripped down to my underwear. All my luggage, etc was gone through; with a fine tooth comb.

I didn't find any of it excessive. I admit, I didn't go through what those people did (assuming their stories are true).

DMK
December 20, 2003, 07:03 PM
However, when I came back, through Norfolk VA, I ran into all kinds of problems. I was jammed up by the security and police. This, after me even showing I was a police officer. I didn't receive any special treatment at all. I wasn't handcuffed, however I was stripped down to my underwear. All my luggage, etc was gone through; with a fine tooth comb.
I didn't find any of it excessive. I find that excessive. I think that as a nation we have become very desensitized to what a Police State is. :fire:

I grew up in the NY metro area of all places, but these days, I will never go back to the North East nor will I fly in a commercial airplane anywhere. I will not put up with having my rights trampled for the illusion of safety.

I know people that fly regularly and complain about being searched and the humiliation of it all, yet they go right back and keep buying airline tickets. Let the airlines wither and die I say, then let them blame the government for it. Which is where the blame belongs.

7.62FullMetalJacket
December 20, 2003, 07:29 PM
It may have been those Help Wanted ads that started out: "Welfare payments not keeping you in PS2 games? Got a pulse? Can you fog a mirror? Have you always wanted a badge of your very own? Have we got a career track for you!"

Thanks Tamara. How true.

I will vouch for this type of treatment. I was squeezed pretty hard 14 months ago in Oakland. I have not flown since. I will not provide details because of an ongoing suit.............. I can believe it:mad:

c_yeager
December 21, 2003, 02:36 AM
i remember being offered a job with airport security back when i got out of highschool (pre TSA). Even for a temporary summer job for an innexperienced student their offer was a joke. It didnt compare favorably even to burger flipping. I cant imagine it has changed all that much. And Tamara's example "advertisement" is pretty accurate except for one glaring fault, its in english.

Dr.Rob
December 21, 2003, 07:54 AM
Yet another reason to wear clean underwear.

I've flown a number of times with firearms, but honestly I haven't done it since 9-11.

Tamara
December 21, 2003, 09:48 AM
I was stripped down to my underwear...

I didn't find any of it excessive.

We are so screwed. :(

wingman
December 21, 2003, 10:31 AM
I stopped flying commerical and at one time I enjoyed the experience, however
I do not believe I will again. As population increases we will lose more freedom,
if my past 60+ years are any indication.

Don Gwinn
December 21, 2003, 10:43 AM
What would be excessive, if not a strip search of a citizen who has complied with all the rules?

TallPine
December 21, 2003, 02:47 PM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was stripped down to my underwear...

I didn't find any of it excessive.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Well, some people do enjoy that sort of thing, you know .... ;)

Edward429451
December 21, 2003, 03:53 PM
We are so screwed

We get screwed if we comply and screwed harder if we don't comply. Some choice. I don't fly but the first time any official tells me to drop my pants, I'm going for his throat. Beg for mercy thru compliance for a promise of vaseline? I think not.

Sorry for the sarcasm, but this stuff is over the edge.

"Drop your pants, free man":rolleyes:

We are so screwed

elkhunter
December 21, 2003, 04:19 PM
That is disturbing. I realize that we need to keep our airlines safe and everything, but stories like that just seem over the top.
My girlfriend got searched in the airport once. Seems she was really, really, tired and forgot the warnings not to talk about terrorists while standing in line and, and the TSA pulled her aside to search her bags. Now, my question is if two middle-easterners were standing in same such line and talking about terrorism would the TSA search their belongings too? I have a feeling they wouldn't because that would be "profiling" and the US government doesn't do that. riiiiigggghhhhhht. :banghead: :fire: :banghead: :fire: :barf: :scrutiny:

Oleg Volk
December 21, 2003, 04:30 PM
Seems to me the simplest way out of a search would be to just waste the ticket and walk away. Not sure that gestapo employees would let anyone just leave but that would be worth a try.

Some new digital cameras can radio transmit images to a remote location. Cell phones can be used to take pictures. Unless signal jamming is used across multiple frequencies, the entire process of interaction with TSA (and also faces and badges of the participants) can be recorded and broadcast in real time. Not sure that would be enough to keep them in line...more likely, they'll try to criminalize recording of the Fatherland Security activities.

TallPine
December 21, 2003, 04:47 PM
Seems to me the simplest way out of a search would be to just waste the ticket and walk away.
"See the U - S - A, in your K - I - A ...."

:D

(I suppose I'm the only one old enough to remember Dinah Shore)

7.62FullMetalJacket
December 21, 2003, 04:53 PM
"See the U - S - A, in your K - I - A ...."

LMAO :what: :D :rolleyes: :uhoh: :neener:

R-Tex12
December 21, 2003, 04:56 PM
Nope, TallPine - you're not the only one! I'll bet you remember "sticking plasters", too! :D

Back to the topic; it really doesn't seem there's much we can do aside from avoiding air travel. There don't seem to be many alternatives if you're planning an overseas trip. Sad situation we're in.

R-Tex

pax
December 22, 2003, 01:36 PM
Back to the topic; it really doesn't seem there's much we can do aside from avoiding air travel. There don't seem to be many alternatives if you're planning an overseas trip. Sad situation we're in.
You make a good point, R-Tex12. But I think we've a lot to fear from the frog-in-the-kettle syndrome.

Tetleyb commented: However, when I came back, through Norfolk VA, I ran into all kinds of problems. I was jammed up by the security and police. This, after me even showing I was a police officer. I didn't receive any special treatment at all. I wasn't handcuffed, however I was stripped down to my underwear. All my luggage, etc was gone through; with a fine tooth comb.

I didn't find any of it excessive.
I didn't respond to this when it was originally posted, because I had such an overwhelming sensation of rage and fear when I read it that I could not have said anything appropriate to THR. Now that I've calmed down a bit, I do have a few things to say.

I've been reading Dave Grossman's excellent book On Killing. An extended quote which may shed some light on my unhappy reaction to tetleyb's post: Dr. Stanley Milgram's famous studies at Yale University on obedience and aggression found that in a controlled laboratory environment more than 65 percent of his subjects could be readily manipulated into inflicting a (seemingly) lethal electrical charge on a total stranger. The subjects sincerely believed that they were causing great physical pain, but despite their victim's pitiful pleas for them to stop, 65 percent continued to obey orders, increase the voltage, and inflict the shocks until long after the screams stopped and there could be little doubt that their victim was dead. ....

Freud warned us to "never underestimate the power of the need to obey," and this research by Milgram (which has since been replicated many times in half a dozen different countries) validates Freud's intuitive understanding of human nature. Even when the trappings of authority are no more than a white lab coat and a clipboard, this is the kind of response that Milgram was able to elicit:

"I observed a mature and initially poised businessman enter the laboratory smiling and confident. Within 20 minutes he was reduced to a twitching, stuttering wreck, who was rapidly approaching a point of nervous collapse.... At one point he pushed his fist into his forehead and muttered: 'Oh God, let's stop it.' And yet he continued to respond to every word of the experimenter and obeyed to the end."

If this kind of obedience could be obtained with a lab coat and a clipboard by an authority figure who has been known for only a few minutes, how much more would the trappings of military authority and months of bonding accomplish?
Grossman went on to discuss the ways in which a commanding officer's presence and authority can impel his troops to make kills which they would not otherwise make, but I veered off onto a (hardly original) tangent of my own and got thinking about the many ways in which Milgram's research explains the evil that was Hitler's Germany, that was Stalin's Russia, that was Pol Pot's Cambodia. I've always marvelled at the sheer compliance of the masses in such cases, and wondered even more at the ordinary grunts who actually committed most the atrocities. How could they?

Grossman's thesis is that most ordinary human beings have an inborn and very powerful resistance to killing other humans, and that it takes certain extraordinary circumstances before this resistance is broken down enough to enable one ordinary person to kill another at close quarters. You would think that with such a thesis, the book would be encouraging for the future -- but it's actually very bleak indeed, especially in light of Milgram's research.

In that frame of mind I read tetleyb's offering. "I didn't find any of it excessive." He saw nothing wrong with an ordinary citizen going about his lawful occasions being almost strip-searched in public by some petty bureaucratic minions. The TSA minions aren't just scabby little minions, after all. They represent the rule of law and their uniforms reinforce that.

So now tell me, people: what happens now? Now that we've gutted large portions of our Bill of Rights, now that everyone is so worried about terrorists that they're willing to put up with behavior from the authorities that would have been unthinkable a generation ago? What's the next step? If the government chooses to misuse and abuse its suddenly expanded powers, what does Milgram's research say the common man will do in response?

Will the ordinary grunt obey brutal and unlawful orders? Will ordinary citizens comply and cooperate with men in uniform committing foul deeds? I see no reason to believe they will not.

Worse than that, I just looked over my bookshelves earlier today. There are a lot of really good books on the shelves, going back a lot of years. One of the recurring themes in literature (at least in the literature I read) is the beauty and power of taking responsibility for one's own actions and one's own choices. From Voltaire to Gandhi, from MLK to Andrew Jackson to e.e. cummings, from Emerson to Thoreau and from Swift to Solzhenitzen, from Kepler to Abraham Lincoln to Spurgeon to Mark Twain to Bertrand Russell and Orson Scott Card, it seems to me that nearly every author who ever set pen to paper and nearly ever orator who ever mounted the podium has given laudatory words about the value and virtue of nonconformity.

And yet, it suddenly occurred to me that the very prevalence of these glowing words is pretty darn depressing. You don't, after all, often encounter people lauding the commonplace. Nor is a soldier decorated for doing merely what is expected of him. Such laurels are for those who do the extraordinary ... which leads me to the depressing (but again, hardly original) conclusion that if-and-when, it'll be the majority against a tiny minority; and of that minority, a predictably large number will lose their zeal when faced with the disapprobation of the crowd.

So here we are again, back at tetleyb's post. The only sure way to defeat such reasoning is to be in the majority, and use the power of the group against it. Well, our members can do that here. Just barely. But do you think this web site is a microcosm of American society, an accurate reflection of the forces at work in our culture? Hardly. We're heavily biased toward freedom, toward individual liberty and its attendant responsibility. And even here, such opinions aren't overwhelmingly despised as they ought to be.

There doesn't seem to be much reason to hope that America is going to do anything other than what it has been doing, and that is to spiral steadily toward a police state. Nor does there seem to be anything much that I as an ordinary citizen can do about it, other than to watch its demise and mourn for what it was -- as R-Tex12 and others have pointed out.

Maybe, though, if I and enough people like me became not merely sad and resigned, but angry enough to do something about it, before it is too late to reverse what appears irreversible ...?

Anger may be able to accomplish what resignation will not.

pax

Be angry, but not without cause... -- the Bible

carpettbaggerr
December 22, 2003, 06:10 PM
I didn't find any of it excessive. I admit, I didn't go through what those people did (assuming their stories are true). You're an active, sworn police officer? And they still felt the need to conduct a strip-search? And you don't think that's excessive? I'm not sure which one is more disturbing.

kbr80
December 22, 2003, 06:24 PM
"Papers Please" is no longer a joking matter. Its reality.

7.62FullMetalJacket
December 22, 2003, 07:23 PM
pax, thanks for the thoughts. We all need to be reminded occasionally.

Balog
December 22, 2003, 07:35 PM
I have to say, I've rarely seen the ideals of freedom and self-reliance expressed as well as pax does on a fairly regular basis. Have you ever thought about trying to get published pax? If you're gonna do all this writing you may as well make some extra shootin money off of it.:)

Smurfslayer
December 22, 2003, 07:45 PM
VCDL puts out the VA Alert emails weekly. This was linked there. As much as it pains me to do this... The person (victim) was breaking the law.:mad:

Go to http://leg1.state.va.us ; Table of Contents ; Title 5, chapter 10. You are looking for the MWAA enabling legislation. Unfortunately, the Virginia General Assembly, in it's infinite stupidity, created this monolith to regulate Reagan & Dulles Airports, granted blanket authority to create rules with the penalty of law up to a class 1 misdemeanor, and enforce them on all their property - Airport, access roads, rights of way, including parts of route 28, 606 and surrounding easements. MWAA stands for Metro Washington Airports authority, and as you see above was created by compact with MD & DC, by an act of the VA General Assembly. MWAA regulation 8.4 & 8.5 states that you may not have a dangerous article... even shipped firearms must be disassembled "as far as they can be". Virginia is the court of jurisdiction.

1st, MWAA's enabling legislation is overly broad, and violates the Virginia Constitution. 2nd, the VA AG has stated clearly that unless the GA expressly grants authority to regulate firearms, none exists - see
VA AG website decision Black '02. 3rd, VA has complete preemption but for a couple grandfathered ordinances that are pre-'87, and MWAA ignored this, and previous acts of the General Assembly in creating these regulations. Obviously, these Alpha Hotels are in need of some oversight.

What I find most significant is that the Commonwealth dropped the charges... They must have known the case would be decided against, rendering the 'regulation' in question... AND - they returned the firearms - WHOA....

I don't believe that a lawsuit would be sustainable here. All of the government folks would be insulated and protected by sovereign immunity.

carpettbaggerr
December 22, 2003, 07:59 PM
MWAA regulation 8.4 & 8.5 states that you may not have a dangerous article... even shipped firearms must be disassembled "as far as they can be". Virginia is the court of jurisdiction.

So according to federal, state, and local law, you can transport guns in your checked bags. But you can't have them inside the airport because they are a dangerous article? Don't you love bureaucracy? Seems like a test case is called for.

GigaBuist
December 22, 2003, 10:03 PM
I don't like it, but sometimes work has my fly off every now and again. When I travel for leisure I just drive -- it's much more fun, and I'm my own boss then.

Anyway, after going through the security gates about a year ago I decided I didn't like some guy waving a wand at me if anything set off the metal detector. I remove everything reasonable from my body before I pass through that stupid thing. On my last trip I actually had a TSA agent tell me as I'm removing my shoes "You don't have to do that anymore" -- I still did. Belt, shoes, wallet, keys, pen, pocket change, hat, coat, cellphone, cellphone clip, all of it on the counter. Let them watch it pass through the scanner.

If, for some reason, I still set off that freaking metal detector my plan is simple: Walk back through, remove shirt, pants, down to my boxers and socks, toss clothing onto belt and walk back through. I'm not very modest. Make a scene of the situation before you let them make a scene out of you I guess. If "junior" flops out of the boxers and offends somebody, sorry -- that's the price you pay for "security."

I still don't have it down entirely. Learned just last week that you can't pass through the metal detector with a magazine (the printed kind on paper) in your hand.

R-Tex12
December 23, 2003, 01:11 PM
Pax, that was an extremely well-written and thought-out post. Thanks!

pax wrote:

Maybe, though, if I and enough people like me became not merely sad and resigned, but angry enough to do something about it, before it is too late to reverse what appears irreversible ...?

I'd really love to see some ideas (besides the "Blow 'em all away & let God sort 'em out" variety) presented & discussed. I'll be the first to admit that I have ZERO contributions afa possible ideas are concerned, but I wholeheartedly agree that merely resigning ourselves to the situation is most likely a recipe for certain disaster.

Aside from joining & contributing to the NRA, GOA, etc. and working for the election of those we perceive to be pro-gun rights, does anyone have any suggestions? If your state doesn't yet have right-to-carry laws, working for their passage as John Ross does might be a step in the right direction. We already have CCW laws here, so I'm drawing a blank on anything I can do that would have any overall significance.

R-Tex

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
December 23, 2003, 01:33 PM
Aside from joining & contributing to the NRA, GOA, etc. and working for the election of those we perceive to be pro-gun rights, does anyone have any suggestions

Belonging to national organizations is important, but local grassroots political activisim is also vital to promote the RKBA.

For example, as was mentioned by another poster, Virginia has an excellent grassroots orginization, the Virginia Citizens Defense league, that has been very effective in lobbying the State legislature for things like shall-issue, abolishing excessive requests for personal information during gun sales, and many other areas including the right to carry in airports around the State.

Maryland now has it's counterpart, the Maryland Citizen's Defense League modeled after the one in Virginia. It'll be interesting to see what progress they can make in Maryland with the leftist extremists who comprise much of it's government.

AZRickD
December 31, 2003, 10:36 AM
Does anyone wonder why we have to declare a firearm in the first place?

What security purpose does it serve? Why must ammo be stored separately?

Rick

Russ
December 31, 2003, 11:34 AM
QUIT WHINING AND MOVE TO FRANCE.

Balog
December 31, 2003, 12:03 PM
Russ: uhhhhh what? We're holding our government accountable for it's infringement of our rights (or "whining" as you call it) precisely because we don't want to become a Euro-trash style socialist hellhole. But I suppose screaming and calling names works if you can't support your position any other way. :rolleyes:

riverdog
December 31, 2003, 12:44 PM
I'm not Russ, but I don't see anybody in this story holding anybody accountable. It appears that they are not going to press the detainment, questioning and confiscation of weapons on the part of airport security, TSA and the FBI. The "government" is getting away with it because folks like John won't file a lawsuit and force these guys to justify their actions.

In spite of all the harrassment that the flying public has endured in the post 9/11 world of TSA, I for one don't feel any safer. We're all being given a big placebo and asked to swallow. The FBI, CIA MI-5 and (lately) Moammar Gadhafi are doing their best to make the world a safer place. But TSA is not helping things with the strong arm tactics frequently cited in these airport horror stories.

They need to get a grip on their regulations and quit pissing off the public for following the law. John conformed with the law as the Commonwealth of Virginia determined in deciding to not prosecute. TSA should have realized this at the ticket counter, but the agents had their minds made up. Since no one ever sues, they feel empowered to do whatever they can get away with.

They need to be held accountable in court, not on the internet.

Russ
December 31, 2003, 12:49 PM
Balog,

The people involved should seek redress if they feel they have been wronged. What is happening here is whining about something that you can't change short of elections or in court if are the agreived party. This is like complaining because a minimum wage employee at at Wal Mart doesn't know the difference between a 9mm and a 45. This is really not a wide spread thing. They don't pay these people enough to care and until they do you can expect this outcome every now and then. You do get what you pay for in this world. Usually less. However, far be it from me to dissuade you or anyone else from moaning about it.Write your Congress person. Please share their response if you get one.

seeker_two
December 31, 2003, 01:09 PM
This is why I'll never travel by air....

It's will be safer for me...

...and for the first TSA agent who plays "Schmuckatelli". :evil:

Oleg: Let us know if we can set up a legal defense fund for your friends. I'd like to contribute...

pax
December 31, 2003, 01:16 PM
It appears that they are not going to press the detainment, questioning and confiscation of weapons on the part of airport security, TSA and the FBI. The "government" is getting away with it because folks like John won't file a lawsuit and force these guys to justify their actions.
Riverdog,

You are mistaken as to facts.
The people involved should seek redress if they feel they have been wronged. What is happening here is whining about something that you can't change short of elections or in court if are the agreived party. This is like complaining because a minimum wage employee at at Wal Mart doesn't know the difference between a 9mm and a 45. This is really not a wide spread thing.
Russ,

Even if the people involved were not seeking civil or criminal redress, this sort of thing is valuable. I want to hear every single stinkin' story of abuse from my employees. If such abuses are not publicized, ill informed people might be able to claim, "This is not a wide spread thing" even when such abuses have become quite common. No one will ever act to correct widespread abuse within the system (or correct a system that is in itself abusive) if the problem isn't publicized.

So even if, for one reason or another, the people involved weren't pursuing justice through the courts, such stories are valuable and should be heeded.

Incidentally, not everyone can afford to buy justice these days. When I hear such tales, I'm always saddened at the number of people who have no legal redress because they don't have the financial resources to pursue them. That's one more reason why such complaints should never be stifled, and should be passed along by those of us who have votes and voices.

R-Tex,

Been thinking about what you asked. Obviously, voting for freedom would help. So would writing letters to your local papers.

When you hear tales like John and Kit's, if you have money, you could toss a few bucks into the legal pot.

If you're as dedicated as a Jim March, you could become informed about legal and political issues and hold the politicos' feet to the fire making them follow their own rules.

Of course you could write letters to your congresspeople, and visit them in person at least once a session -- with an informed view to present.

When hearings come open at the state capital, you could show up and talk (funny story there -- last time I did that, at one point I was sitting in the gallery and eyeing an almost asleep representative propped up on one elbow with eyes half shut. Person mounted the stand and began to talk, mentioning where he was from. Sleepy rep sat up straight, eyes wide open, started taking notes -- and bounded out of the room to shake hands the second the person from his district was done talking. They do listen, or at least try to give that impression!)

Most of all, when you hear crud like this, don't just go back to sleep and forget it. Keep it in mind when election season rolls around. Who was in office? How'd these rules get into effect? If you've told your elected people (by your silence) that you don't much care if they allow crud like this to happen on their watch, and then tell them again (by voting for them again even though crud like this happened and they did nothing about it or even encouraged it) -- well, it wouldn't be surprising if crud like this kept happening.

pax

The most important political office is that of private citizen. --- Louis Brandeis

7.62FullMetalJacket
December 31, 2003, 01:25 PM
Redress through elections and courts is difficult.

Voting with your cash is not. :D

riverdog
December 31, 2003, 01:49 PM
On which facts am I mistaken?

Balog
December 31, 2003, 01:51 PM
pax: thanks for rebutting that. Saves me the time ;)

pax
December 31, 2003, 02:52 PM
riverdog,

You assumed that the appearance of the tale on the internet meant the participants were not seeking redress through the courts.

pax

moa
December 31, 2003, 03:06 PM
A couple of things to add.

For Marylanders who are interested in grass-root pro-RKBA organization there is Tripwire. Tripwire is a periodic newsletter about Maryland firearms issues mostly.

Last I heard, Tripwire has about 25,000 subscribers and is free. Donations appreciated. Tripwire also engages in legal actions against various governances.

Tripwire has its own website called www.direct-action.org.

Also want to point out that under 18 United States Code, lying too or trying to deceive any Federal agent conducting an official investigation is the same as perjury, which is a felony. That is why it is best not to speak to any Federal agent, or any LEO, other than to identify yourself if you think you are the target of some kind of investigation. Maybe not even then.

And if they ask you why you are not cooperating, tell them it is under advice of counsel. At that point, IIRC, the questioning is suppose to stop. If they want to arrest you they will anyway. If no arrest, then at that point I would ask them if I a free to leave.

I am not a lawyer, so take these remarks for what they are. Free.

riverdog
December 31, 2003, 04:21 PM
Pax,.
So I did. How did I reach that conclusion -- facts not in evidence? So by saying I was mistaken, are you saying some pertinent facts are missing? After that read I thought I had the whole story. Apparently there's more. Good luck to John if he does file.

R-Tex12
December 31, 2003, 04:26 PM
pax,

Many thanks for your response and suggestions. Especially the one regarding attending the sessions at the State Capitol - Austin is just a short drive from Thunder Ranch. :) (I will, however, have to be on the lookout so as to avoid running over El Tejon on the way there!)

If you have an address for sending a contribution to John and Kit's legal fund, I would be delighted to send a check. If you would rather not post it publicly, please PM me.

That there are those who love to complain but are unwilling to make an effort to fight what they are complaining about has long been a pet peeve of mine.

Thanks again,

R-Tex

Russ
December 31, 2003, 09:47 PM
Balog,

Pax's rebuttal was quite good in justifying the initial post. I just think none of this matters unless your Congress Person (that's PC for Congressman) hears your opinion about it. I know from your profile that you are a commited, determined person. Please don't take my rantings personally. Let the idiots that make the rules and can make a difference know. That's about all you or I can do. I did it for years in California to no avail. At least I tried. I still do it here. The other option is to vote the BOZO's out.

Happy New Year to You! :)

Russ

Cosmoline
December 31, 2003, 10:16 PM
The ONLY reason I'm not out there declaring armed revolt right now is that this nonsense is still largely limited to the airports. In theory you're free to simply not fly. I've personally chosen that option. But of course the evil is spreading, and I have no doubt that in the hands of future administrations the TSA will grow and grow to encompass interstate highways, buses, trains, etc. I also have little doubt that when a Dem is back in power the expanded federal powers will be used to come after US. We're real high on the list.

It don't look good. Not good at all.

Balog
January 1, 2004, 02:28 AM
Happy New Year to you to Russ! :)

I'd have to disagree with you about this type of discussion being pointless. I happen to subscribe to Claire Wolfe's view that "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." I think rabble rousing could be a more effective form of activism than petitioning a government that refuses to even hear a 2'nd Amendment case at the Supreme level. Add in the crushing of dissent with Campaign Finance, the never ending encroachments of the War on Drugs/Terror/Freedom, and American citizens being declared enemy combatants and denied their rights..... I'm not getting too excited about We the People's chances of turning the ship around. To quote one of my favorite patriots
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams

M1911Owner
January 1, 2004, 02:41 PM
Amendment IV

The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularity describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Hmmm... Airport searches, no warrants, no probable cause, no oath or affirmation...

I guess I missed it -- when did we pass an amendment repealing the 4th Amendment?

buzz_knox
January 1, 2004, 03:13 PM
When you fly (or even enter an airport), you are giving consent to having your baggage searched, or possibly even your person. 4th Amendment isn't violated. Don't want to consent, don't show up.

M1911Owner
January 1, 2004, 03:41 PM
OK, follow that to its logical conclusion. The street in front of your house is (usually) public property. If you don't want to give up your rights, don't leave your house.

(Edited to fix mismatched referents.)

LynnMassGuy
January 1, 2004, 03:46 PM
I makes me comepletely nuts when I read that they recomend the woman reconsider her lifestyle choices. How dare they?! Who does these people think they are? What kind of brainwashing are these people given at training? BLECHHH:fire: :banghead: :fire: :cuss: :banghead:

M1911Owner
January 1, 2004, 04:38 PM
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, ... and effects, against unreasonable searches ... shall not be violated... .
I don't see any qualification saying, "except in airports." Like "shall not be infringed," exactly what part of "shall not be violated" is not understood here?

The freedom of movement is a fundamental freedom, an unalienable right. To suppose that you surrender your constitutional rights when you travel is absurd.

Balog
January 1, 2004, 05:53 PM
Actually, if it's the property owners decision enforced by the property owners agents taking place on private property the 4th doesn't apply. It's only when the .gov gets involved that it becomes a problem.

Jayman
January 12, 2004, 11:37 PM
Hey guys, if you care to make a stinky over this, I have posted further information in another thread, including several email addresses and a sample email for you, courtesy of the VCDL, here:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59110

atek3
October 23, 2004, 05:53 PM
were there any ramifications beyond this thread? This seems like a whole lot of fascist nonsense. Luckily I guess I don't "fit the profile" and have made it through security without a whole lot of drama. I guess this story just kind of says, "It could happen to you".

atek3

Jayman
October 24, 2004, 12:21 AM
After going all the way to court, the case was dropped. John had to employ a lawyer and they wouldn't budge until the morning they were to see the judge.

I believe he's attempting to get financial restitution for his defense, I don't know how that is going.

Justin
October 24, 2004, 03:17 PM
QUIT WHINING AND MOVE TO FRANCE. This statement so immediately caused me to see red that I ceased reading this thread immediately to post a response.

Hey, Russ, last time I checked, the United States was built from the ground up to be a nation of individuals free to go about their lives in whatever way they see fit so long as it doesn't infringe on another's life.

If you don't like that, maybe you are the one who should leave this nation. I'm sick and bloody tired of hearing idiot statists bleat about how if someone doesn't want to put up with continued encroachment about freedom that they should leave this nation.

Hardly.

I have a suggestion for the "love it or leave it" American statists.

If you're so fond of living with diminished civil rights, why don't you go find another nation that better suits your tastes. God knows there are plenty out there.

:fire:

RevDisk
October 24, 2004, 03:49 PM
From my own experiences with TSA, I don't doubt a single word. I got really hassled for having a lot of electronics in my bag on my last flight to a conference in Vegas. Try explaining the details of radio equipment to a low level TSA agent sometime... They definitely dislike reading material in anything other than English.

A few of my female friends told me incidents of the airport security personnel try to get uhm "friendly", or at least make comments they shouldn't make in a uniform. No recording, thus no proof. Trying to convince them to make reports has had mixed results. I have bought a few cheap audio recorders to hand out. I'm seriously thinking of carrying one myself whenever I travel.

Ryder
October 24, 2004, 08:42 PM
"It could happen to you"

No it can't. I won't submit myself to that kind of authority.

mfree
October 25, 2004, 11:28 AM
Something's bothering me about this account.

I remember a previous thread unveiling a TSA reg that states that only the owner of the luggage containing checked firearms may open and handle them.

It was stated that "They opened the bags".

Isn't a TSA officer in deep, deep dowlrumple over this?

ctdonath
October 25, 2004, 11:51 AM
I had a comparable case a couple years ago (post 9/11). Have it all on tape, including "we are the law of this airport, and you're not taking that with you" (referring to a totally-by-the-book-declared-and-packed-and-checked G26). Couldn't garner any interest for a case, even from NRA-ILA (who grossly, if not wilfully, misunderstood the incident). I did everything exactly right, was told "no" flatly (after given many squirming excuses which were squashed flat one by one) in total violation of FOPA law and FAA regulations.

PM me if interested in more details, including a copy of the audio.

Jayman
October 25, 2004, 11:56 AM
ctdonath: you ever try talking to the GOA? If nothing else, I'd be tempted to make a big stink on the internet about it...

ctdonath
October 25, 2004, 12:00 PM
It was stated that "They opened the bags". Isn't a TSA officer in deep, deep dowlrumple over this?

Yes, he is.

There is nothing wrong with the account. While my experience was different in particulars, the account perfectly lines up with my experience regarding their cavalier willingness to violate any procedure, regulation and law to elicit any reason to slam you hard. They know you're in the hot seat, all eyes are suspcious of you, they wear the cloak of legitimacy, and won't follow the law unless you can quote or show it verbatum (which you most likely won't).

ctdonath
October 25, 2004, 12:06 PM
I did try to make a big stink, and was generally brushed off with "well, you must have done SOMETHING wrong" - at best I got "go get em'!" but no help whatsoever. I HAVE IT ON TAPE AND NOBODY CARED.

Maybe, with enough such cases, someone will consider class action.

Jayman
October 25, 2004, 12:42 PM
Grrr, that makes me mad. If you want any help making more stink, let me know.

Logistics
October 25, 2004, 01:06 PM
>>>When you fly (or even enter an airport), you are giving consent to having your baggage searched, or possibly even your person. 4th Amendment isn't violated. Don't want to consent, don't show up.<<<

You must be part of the Intelligistia......No ordinary man could be such a fool.

:uhoh: :scrutiny: :barf:

Praxis
May 10, 2006, 10:32 AM
Yikes!! Should have looked at the dates too! Well, below info is current.

Cosmoline, the TSA already is screening other modes of transportation. This month, they tested a moble screening unit on the Baltimore light rail system consisting of a metal detector, bag x-ray, and a "puffer" unit for particle detection. Full trial installations of airport-style screening equipment in major Northeast Corridor rail stations should begin in the next 6-12 months or so. I'm sure bus stations will follow depending on funding.:cuss:

_______________________

Cosmoline
The ONLY reason I'm not out there declaring armed revolt right now is that this nonsense is still largely limited to the airports. In theory you're free to simply not fly. I've personally chosen that option. But of course the evil is spreading, and I have no doubt that in the hands of future administrations the TSA will grow and grow to encompass interstate highways, buses, trains, etc. I also have little doubt that when a Dem is back in power the expanded federal powers will be used to come after US. We're real high on the list.

It don't look good. Not good at all.

Rich K
May 10, 2006, 11:37 AM
I thought we whipped the Nazis and declared the Gestapo a criminal organization 60+ years ago.:fire: Stories like these are why I won't fly,period.Tou get better scenery on the ground, anyway. Just my .02.

Fudgie Ghost
May 10, 2006, 11:31 PM
After re-reading this whole thing, I have just one question: Who likes to get hand-cuffed, him or her?

If you enjoyed reading about "TSA Unlawfully Detains and Questions Two Friends" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!