A Quick Q&A with the TSA before You Go on Your Way

In an effort to streamline security at airports, as well as to alleviate the torrent of complaints regarding their rights-killing security measures, the TSA is now trying out another new security measure at Terminal A at Boston's Logan Airport. This screening will not involve pat-downs or X-rays (if you're lucky), but will instead be just a couple of questions about where you're from, and where you're going. Simple, right?

Here's the catch: they aren't interested in where you've been, they're just seeing how you answer the questions. If you sweat a lot when you're answering the questions, or if you don't look at an officer in the eye, you will have to go through extra screening, even getting the state troopers involved if you are a real basket-case.   While the TSA thinks this process, which should take roughly 20 seconds per passenger, will make life easier for travelers, it is not without its critics (shocking, I know).

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) says that this method hasn't been scientifically proven to spot suspicious persons, and could let a lot of people who might be a threat will go by if they know how to keep calm. Also, as with every new TSA initiative it seems, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), says that it could still violate one's civil rights if they do so much as answer weirdly, which according to the process, could be so much as showing nervousness talking to a uniformed official about your personal travel patterns.

While this might be a well-intentioned middle ground in terms of security, it still has flaws that could be considered discriminatory. It's better than the pat-downs and X-rays, but if the TSA wants to install security measures that both provide Americans with the feeling of security and respects our civil rights, it still has a long way to go.

Originally posted at www.silverunderground.com.

Victory or Letdown for Liberty?

The Wall Street Journal reports, in a victory for liberty, that the DC Circuit Court of Appeals announced their decision today that the TSA violated federal law by installing its pornoscanners (as Reason labels them) in US airports. 

Unfortunatrly, the TSA's illegal activity has only been identified as its failure to notify and seek comments from the public before trampling their rights.  The court rejected claims that the TSA violates the Fourth Amendment, statting "that intrusions on individual privacy must be balanced against the promotion of legitimate government interests."

Apparently these crude, unconsented images are now a legitimate interest of the United States government -- they just have to tell us about it first. Let the naked body scanning continue!

TSA Agent Caught With iPad Stuffed Down His Pants

I feel safer already:

Police have arrested a Transportation Security Administration employee who stole about $50,000 worth of electronics from travelers’ luggage at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport.

Nelson Santiago, 30, of Hollywood, was arrested after an employee with Continental Airlines saw him slip an I-Pad computer out of a suitcase and into his pants on Monday, said Dani Moschella, spokeswoman for Broward Sheriff’s Office.

Video Report:

Is it time to dump the TSA?

Constitution Watch: The Touchy-Feely TSA

For the past year, air travelers have had to go through the misery and tension that are TSA screenings. For some that meant one of two options: going through a full body scan, or getting fondled by administrators. Either method subjects the traveller to invasive searches that both violate one's natural right to privacy, and the 4th amendment prevented illegal search and seizure by the government. Thankfully, there are now people that are doing something about these unnecessary and improper security measures, especially in the wake of some really ridiculous moments.

The most obvious of the challenges to the TSA is the anti-groping legislation working its way through the Texas State Legislature. Initially one of the strongest anti-TSA measures, it was held up after the TSA threatened to close all the airports in Texas if the bill passed, citing that it couldn't guarantee the safety of passengers if it were prevented from doing its job the same way in all areas, and the supremacy clause in the Constitution prevents states from meddling in the affairs of a federal agency. While they have an argument that the constitution prevents states from interfering with federal duties, if that federal duty is inherently unconstitutional, do the states not have a right to challenge or nullify it? Also worthy of note, the pat-down is an alternative to the full body X-ray that is used, and even though the X-ray might be as bad if not worse than a pat down, it could just be used as the sole privacy-violating security measure. So there is no reason other than a federal agency trying to lord its authority over the states that this threat was made, and sets a bad precedent for what the federal government can get away with unchallenged. More at www.silverunderground.com.