« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The Touchy TSA: It’s not sexual assault when it’s the government…

By: LaborUnionReport (Diary)  |  November 14th, 2010 at 10:45 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

As a follow up to this morning’s post on the TSA’s torpedoing of the Constitution comes this disturbing story [via Drudge] of an incident in San Diego.

On Saturday, a traveler named John Tyner was planning to go pheasant hunting in South Dakota when he encountered a cadre blue-shirted of TSA gropers. Unbeknownst to the blue shirts, Tyner had his cell phone on record.

Other than having, perhaps, the most quotable line of the week, Tyner’s ordeal demonstrates the severity of a government out of control, especially when a TSA officer has no problems with sexual assault when it’s the government doing it.

During the next half-hour, his cell phone recorded Tyner refusing to submit to a full body scan, opting for the traditional metal scanner and a basic “pat down” — and then refusing to submit to a “groin check” by a TSA security guard.

He even told the guard, “You touch my junk and I’m going to have you arrested.”

That threat triggered a code red of sorts as TSA agents, supervisors and eventually the local police gravitated to the spot where the reluctant traveler stood in his stocking feet, his cell phone sitting in the nearby bin (which he wasn’t allowed to touch) picking up the audio.

[snip]

Once he threatened to have the TSA agent arrested though, events turned surreal.

A supervisor is heard re-explaining the groin check process to Tyner then adding “If you’re not comfortable with that, we can escort you back out and you don’t have to fly today.”

Tyner responded “OK, I don’t understand how a sexual assault can be made a condition of my flying.”

“This is not considered a sexual assault,” replied the supervisor, calmly.

“It would be if you were not the government,” said Tyner.

“By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights,” countered the TSA supervisor.

“I think the government took them away after 9/11,” said Tyner.

“OK,” came the reply.

You can read Mr. Tyner’s full account of the incident on his blog, as well as listen to the audio here [money quote at 3:45].

When a government agent says its okay for physical molestation to occur because we “gave up a lot of rights” after 9/11, it is time to get them back.

__________________

“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.”  Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

Follow laborunionrpt on Twitter

Tags: , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Carol Tarasewicz

    Janet is trying to show us that George W Bush is not going to outdo Obama in national security, in addition to all the other things poor Obama has had done to him in less than two weeks. No compliments to a reporter? I thought that was a joke but unfortunately for us it isn’t.

    Obama is insecure, in addition to the shellacking he took on 11/2, he’s hurt and upset by the response of the summit. I suggest he go back to Indonesia. I got the impression that they sort of liked him there.

  • Philip

    Dude, it’s creeping me out…….

    • http://www.laborunionreport.com LaborUnionReport

      …

      • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908
  • fellowamerican

    Can we lost the Hitler mustache on Napalitano? It was uncool for lefties to do that to Bush, so why go there? Just sayin.

    • JoeG

      It is a way overused phrase.

      If you mean it, then say it. No need to be weaselly about it.

  • jmimac351

    Go figure.

    The government is showing us who’s boss… we’ll see about that.

  • texasgalt

    A mother on her treatment by the TSA:

    http://www.ourlittlechatterboxes.com/2010/11/tsa-sexual-assault.html

    I will leave you with this thought:

  • walter_hanson

    These brutal tactics are being used because of concern of terrorism. It seems like the critical step is to identify a possible terrorist and give them the stronger treatment before all travellers.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • jmimac351

    Aren’t the Israelis known for their incredibly tight security at airports? Do they do these things?

    Oh, that’s right, they profile people based on behavior since they know very well who the real terrorist threats are.

    • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

      The lefties in charge however just have show “they’re in control”, which comes off more as a totalitarian streak than any use of good judgment, in this whole deal… to stupid to adapt to the culture these parasites are momentarily in charge of it’s ultimately a matter of just having to have their way when shoving bad policies on everyone over all protests/common sense ways of doing things.

      The “doubling down” on this bad policy is just a snapshot of how deaf the left is to reality and a warning to anyone not awake to the danger our liberty is in with the left in charge of things.

  • NeoKong

    I’ve been through one.
    You hold your arms up for five seconds,the guy says ” Thank you sir ” and you’re on your way.
    Unless there is a real and legitimate safety concern then what’s the problem ?
    If someone says it is an invasion of privacy then they are free to take the train.
    The first thing some people will say if a plane blows up in the sky is “Why wasn’t the security better….?”

    If Mr. Shy guy was worried someone might touch his junk he should have just done what he was told. Did he think that TSA agents were standing in line just for an opportunity to rub some strange man’s groin.

    • http://www.laborunionreport.com LaborUnionReport

      …and it went downhill from there. ;)

      Seriously, Neo, while I find it intrusive, I tolerate it to a degree [though they are taking it too far at this point].

      What I would not tolerate is that occurring with my kids.

    • http://www.marklaiminger.org Lammo

      is that, just like everything else TSA does, this has nothing to do with keeping Muslim extremists from trying to blow up airplanes in order to kill innocent civilians. I can guarantee you who will not be subjected to either the full body scan or the groping (and that is what this is when it is conducted without probable cause that a crime has been committed) – - that’s right – - Muslim women wearing traditional clothing who will voice a religious objection WHICH WILL BE HONORED WITHOUT QUESTION. So, the only people who will be exempt from these invasive procedures are exactly the people most likely to be an actual threat to the aircraft. Beyond ridiculous.

      • Finrod

        The words I want to use to describe this whole TSA situation are verboten by site rules, but the one thing I can say is that it’s not doing a single thing towards keeping our airlines safer.

  • Deskpilot

    wear minimal, easy access wrap like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WettRLDC21Q. She them what you can and keep your modesty.
    (use a bikini in leiu fo undergatments.)
    Demand, “You can look but you can NOT touch.”

    Obviousy, not everyone will be okay with this option, but,. I’m just venting my frustration with my governments’ thugs, a.k.a. sexual assaulters.

  • JoeG

    At some point people will quit being willing to fly.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
      • http://www.offthebox.wordpress.com offthebox

        Everyone has a choice…it’s just a matter of whether they are willing to accept the consequences. The TSA officer has a choice as to whether they “follow orders”. If they choose to disobey orders or refuse to follow procedures that violate the constitutional rights of others, the consequence would be they lose their jobs. Similarly, an individual who must fly for their professional work may chose to opt out and not be able to fly, with a consequence of losing their jobs.

        No one in this country is compelled by force of law to engage in any particular type of employment. If an individual values their personal economic security above their constitutional rights, let’s at least have the integrity to say so. I for one find it sad that we ask our troops to sacrifice their lives to protect our freedom, but whine that we “have no choice” if it might mean sacrificing our economic security or chosen profession.

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          Yeah, the guy with three kids is really going to quit his job in the Obama economy.

          Get realistic.

          • http://www.offthebox.wordpress.com offthebox

            Neil,

            I’m not trying to start an argument, but surely this is a legitimate point to raise? The founding fathers pledged (and some lost) their fortunes to procure our liberties. I am fully aware that within our current society the vast majority of people would never quit their job and jepordize what little economic security they have for the sake of liberty. That is realism: most people will complain about the loss of our liberties but be complicit in their loss.

            As a conservative I simply find this state of affairs sad, but not unexpected. I simply was suggesting that raising the “we have no choice” flag *might* a bit of an oversimplification. If people choose to be complicit with the TSA in this matter, fine…but if it’s really that big of an issue to someone who flies for a living, take a stand and trust God in providence that you will be okay.

            It is up to every individual in a free society to prioritize and decide where the lines are they will not cross: is feeding three particular children more important than the liberty of the nation as a whole? Perhaps so for an individual father, but if this is the most “realistic” position then why pull out quotes from Franklin and the like? What does it mean to sacrifice security for liberty if not this?

            I’m guessing that no-one who flies for a living will quit their job over this. But certainly we can all think critically through the issues.

          • JoeG

            I’ve had jobs before where travel was a must. At one time I was doing start ups for complex equipment my employer made and there really was no way to do it other than to visit in person. I’m glad it is rare right now for me to have to travel.

            One thing business people can do is protest by a flying slowdown.

            What would happen if people said no travel for the first half of December? The airlines would whine and their lobbyists would get all of this crap thrown out.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            If I don’t travel to events like the RS Gathering and CPAC, I’m missing out on serious, critical networking opportunities in my line of work.

            I can’t afford that.

  • rabidcaveman

    I’m going to put my iPhone on audio record, as I opt-out. Anything I find untoward a “normal” pat-down, will be on record.
    As said above, it seems that the TSA “suddenly” needs to stop terrorism, but makes 15000x the effort because The Won is in office.
    This will not go away.

  • vasumi

    I work at a prison and we have been patting down visiters and removing shoes long beforer the TSA did and long before 9/11 happened. By doing this and strip seaching the inmates before they leave the visit area we stop most of the drugs and other contraband being smuggled in to inmates. And yes, we pat down children too. You would be amazed at what people have stuffed in a babies diaper.
    This pat down is modeled on a prison visit pat down. Like it or not, it works.

    • Finrod

      .

      • aesthete

        Both for the logic and the movie reference.

    • rabidcaveman

      Who are we kidding, anyway. The people we’re trying to catch, who are trying to kill us, are excluded from “pat-downs”, and body scanners, anyway.

    • BA Cyclone

      If you can’t see the irony of your comparison, then I think the point is lost.

    • BA Cyclone

      If you can’t see the irony of your comparison, then I think the point is lost.

  • america1st

    What if normal (as opposed to the savages of the RoP) folks refused on the basis of their religious beliefs? For example, as an atheist, I acknowledge no deity, but do believe fervently in the US Constitution, a chief tenet of which is found in the Fourth Amendment – to be secure in my person?

    This has gone to way too far. This is Gestapo & NKVD / KGB territory and way beyond the limit envisioned by the Founding Fathers, even beyond the revisionists in SCOTUS. It is so ripe for legal challenge and the resultant negative publicity . . . well worth the cost of an airline ticket if there were some Constitutional lawyers willing to take on the jack-booted thugs of the TSA.

    Wonder what would happen if about 100 people ‘happened’ to arrive @ about the same time and all of them have their videos running as those in front of them are run through the gauntlet? Of course those processed could turn around & film the fate of later victims. Methinks the scene would be much like watching the results of a demolished ant hill, as the JBTs realize they are on candid camera. – and would make for some great social media viewing!

    Oh, and everyone so assaulted should make careful note of names & badge numbers.

  • tjpeco

    There is a huge effort underway to make the TSA look like idiots by 4chan and Reddit internet boards (don’t even go there, your brain will rot reading the tripe)

    Immature people doing immature things to circumvent reasonable measures to protect us while we are vulnerable 30,000′ above sea level.

    • Locked and Loaded
    • Locked and Loaded
    • http://www.marklaiminger.org Lammo

      about a search without a reasonable articulable suspicion of criminal activity? That is the minimum standard for a law enforcement encounter with a citizen on the streets. They can’t meet it and that is the minimum that the constitution requires. Oh, by the way, the TSA are idiots.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens