1. tfk
  2. My comment for Barbara Boxer

My comment for Barbara Boxer

By tfk on November 16, 2010.

Left at her online comment form:

I fly regularly, both for work and to visit my family in New Jersey. I have probably taken at least one round trip flight every year of my life, and lately I fly several times a year. I am not a threat to aviation.

Why does the TSA treat me and every other traveler as if we were criminal suspects, then? The new x-ray scanners are profoundly invasive, and potentially threaten travelers' health. They would also be easy for terrorists to evade. The alternative to this dangerous and invasive x-ray is an invasive search that I would consider sexual harassment. As someone who has to fly for work, and to see my family, I object to this Hobson's choice (travel and be sexually violated or do not travel and lose my job and family).

The new pat-downs have been compared to what police do during a probable cause search, which would make sense if TSA agents had probable cause to search me and my fellow passengers. But they don't. Since the crash of United 93, every attack that got as far as the airport has been foiled not by TSA, but by the flight crews and passengers. That is a strength of our system, and the adversarial, distrustful, insulting, and deeply invasive searches now being implemented weaken that successful line of defense.

In the TSA oversight hearing tomorrow, please ask why some more sensible balance can't be found, and why passengers who rightly opt out of these invasive searches are subject to $10,000 fines and civil suits.

What are you telling your Senators?

Tags
Policy and Politics

More like this

TSA Backlash week
I travel a lot for work, and to see my family on the East Coast. As such, I keep a fairly close eye on changes in TSA screening, and have always been a bit squicked by the backscatter machines (or porno scanners, as I've seen them called). My issue is mostly discomfort with some random person…
A presumption of guilt makes people angry
At The American Prospet, staff writer Adam Serwer ponders Why We Are Angry at the TSA: The amount of freedom Americans have handed over to their government in the years since the 9/11 attacks is difficult to convey. We've simply accepted the idea of the government secretly listening in on our phone…
Invasive Searches and Underage Drinking
Kevin Drum posted an anti-rant about the TSA, which argues that the new scanners and pat-downs aren't an outrage because they really mean well: I'm not trying to defend everything TSA has put in place. Some of the stuff they do, like the penknife and nail clipper bans, really is stupid. And maybe…
Al Qaeda isn't Lex Luthor
Lex Luthor is incredibly evil, and incredibly powerful. He's a technological genius, and from his research he created an astonishing pile of wealth. He's so rich, and so powerful, that he can divert resources from his research labs to produce weapons with which to wage war on Superman. Luthor's…

Sent to my senator, Warner of Virginia:

Scanning that enables a screener to see beneath an airline passenger's clothing and pat-down searches that extend to men's and women's genitals and women's breasts are sufficiently intrusive to be unreasonable in the absence of probable cause. TSA employees are functioning as agents of the government and as such ought to be subject to the Fourth Amendment, which establishes "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The right to travel is fundamental to a free citizenry, and no one should have to waive his or her constitutional rights in order to board an ordinary conveyance.