(full site)
Fark.com

Try out our new mobile site!


Back To Main
   TSA: "Photography at the checkpoint is perfectly legal, but we may try to have you arrested anyway"

20 Nov 2012 05:02 PM   |   12643 clicks   |   Washington Examiner
Showing 1-50 of 103 comments
Refresh Page 2
View Comments:
Gig103    [TotalFark]  
Burns added that while the TSA, "does not prohibit photographs at screening locations, local laws, state statutes, or local ordinances may."

Way to pass the buck, numbnuts. And shame on the jurisdictions who try to criminalize watching the watchers.

20 Nov 2012 02:44 PM
Walker    [TotalFark]  
"We will no longer allow the TSA to stick their hands down our pants

Solution: drop pants.
img.photobucket.comView Full Size

20 Nov 2012 02:46 PM
Blues_X    [TotalFark]  
and our officers will continue to uphold our high standards of professionalism

lulz

20 Nov 2012 02:50 PM
bunner     
"TSA takes its mission to protect the safety of the traveling public seriously and our officers will continue to uphold our high standards of professionalism during the busy holiday season,"

AHHHHHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH ha ha ha.. hoo, *snort* ha ahah HAHAHAHAHahahahh.. ha

*breathe**breathe**breathe**breathe*

HAAAAAA AhahahahAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahaAHaHAAHHAH! 1

Hoo hoo hooooooo, yeah... No the f*ck you don't, you slimy Nazi, thieving cocksuckers.  AHHH hahahahahahahahahahah

20 Nov 2012 03:04 PM
vpb    [TotalFark]  
I don't like TSA much, but I don't know where this idea that there is some sort of right to photography comes from. Just because it isn't a crime doesn't mean that they can't set rules in their own facilities or have people who don't follow them thrown out of arrested for trespassing.

And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.

20 Nov 2012 03:33 PM
real_headhoncho    [TotalFark]  
When will Fark get a TSA tag?

Bedpans, people. Carry a bedpan with you and bash someone over the head with it when they try to remove your rights and dignity because they think they are making the world a safer place.

20 Nov 2012 03:35 PM
Caradoc    [TotalFark]  

vpb: I don't like TSA much, but I don't know where this idea that there is some sort of right to photography comes from.


Among other reasons:

http://www.dailytech.com/First+Circu it+Court+of+Appeals+Rules+that+C it izens+Can+Videotape+Police/article2258 7.htm

"The filming of government officials engaged in their duties in a public place, including police officers performing their responsibilities, fits comfortably within these principles [of protected First Amendment activity].," said the Court. "Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting the free discussion of governmental affairs."

http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-informat ion/taking-pictures-checkpoint 

20 Nov 2012 03:43 PM
scottydoesntknow    [TotalFark]  

vpb: And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.


Fark yea I'm blaming the poorly paid low ranking workers now. There's no "Just following orders" with the TSA anymore. The workers know they work for a corrupt, shiatty organization, and still choose to work there. They add nothing of value and are more likely to take something of value away.

TSA workers use their job to cheat, steal, grope, steal, insult, steal, belittle, steal, etc. from people just trying to get from one place to another.

When a headline actually comes through FARK saying "TSA FINALLY STOPS A TERRORIST!" I will eat my words, but so far the only people to stop suspected terror plots are the actual passengers (shoe bomb guy comes to mind).

Here's a little article from Forbes on the difference betwen a private contractor company and the TSA on airport security: Link

TL/DR: SFO screeners processed 65% more passengers per screener than did their counterparts at LAX. That's not a typo: 65%. SFO screeners receive the same wages and benefits as those hired and managed by the TSA, and SFO uses virtually identical procedures and equipment. The difference is that the private contractor in San Francisco has no sense of entitlement or feeling of permanency. Competition works. There is far less turnover of screeners at SFO, and the contractor saves money by using part-timers (all fully trained, of course) to meet peak periods rather than keeping full-timers waiting around for periodic surges.

20 Nov 2012 03:45 PM
Darth_Lukecash    [TotalFark]  

scottydoesntknow: vpb: And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.

Fark yea I'm blaming the poorly paid low ranking workers now. There's no "Just following orders" with the TSA anymore. The workers know they work for a corrupt, shiatty organization, and still choose to work there. They add nothing of value and are more likely to take something of value away.

TSA workers use their job to cheat, steal, grope, steal, insult, steal, belittle, steal, etc. from people just trying to get from one place to another.

When a headline actually comes through FARK saying "TSA FINALLY STOPS A TERRORIST!" I will eat my words, but so far the only people to stop suspected terror plots are the actual passengers (shoe bomb guy comes to mind).

Here's a little article from Forbes on the difference betwen a private contractor company and the TSA on airport security: Link

TL/DR: SFO screeners processed 65% more passengers per screener than did their counterparts at LAX. That's not a typo: 65%. SFO screeners receive the same wages and benefits as those hired and managed by the TSA, and SFO uses virtually identical procedures and equipment. The difference is that the private contractor in San Francisco has no sense of entitlement or feeling of permanency. Competition works. There is far less turnover of screeners at SFO, and the contractor saves money by using part-timers (all fully trained, of course) to meet peak periods rather than keeping full-timers waiting around for periodic surges.


Do the Part timers get the same bennies? I think not...

20 Nov 2012 03:50 PM
Caradoc    [TotalFark]  

scottydoesntknow: Fark yea I'm blaming the poorly paid low ranking workers now. There's no "Just following orders" with the TSA anymore. The workers know they work for a corrupt, shiatty organization, and still choose to work there.


That's a bit harsh. Some of them surely only work for the TSA because they simply have nowhere else to go, being completely lacking in any sort of marketable skills.

The rest of them seem to enjoy their "work."

20 Nov 2012 03:51 PM
bunner     

Caradoc: Some of them surely only work for the TSA because they simply have nowhere else to go, being completely lacking in any sort of marketable skills.


And it f*cking well shows, dunnit?

20 Nov 2012 03:54 PM
scottydoesntknow    [TotalFark]  

Caradoc: That's a bit harsh. Some of them surely only work for the TSA because they simply have nowhere else to go, being completely lacking in any sort of marketable skills.


So lets put them in charge of searching people's belongings and bodies? If you can't even qualify for a minimum wage job at a fast food place, why do they think it's a good idea to put them in charge of national security at airports?

Maybe it's the same as LEOs (99 bad apples spoil the 1 good one), but you work for a shiatty ass organization, be prepared for shiatty ass attitudes.

20 Nov 2012 04:00 PM
Caradoc    [TotalFark]  

scottydoesntknow: If you can't even qualify for a minimum wage job at a fast food place, why do they think it's a good idea to put them in charge of national security at airports?


You're asking the wrong person. Maybe you should ask your Congressperson.

20 Nov 2012 04:01 PM
what_now    [TotalFark]  

Caradoc: scottydoesntknow: If you can't even qualify for a minimum wage job at a fast food place, why do they think it's a good idea to put them in charge of national security at airports?

You're asking the wrong person. Maybe you should ask your Congressperson.


I have. And now, I like him a whole lot, but I got a " well, we need to protect people" line from his staffer, which is incredibly disappointing.

We would be far safer with a pack of beagles running around.

20 Nov 2012 04:40 PM
Caradoc    [TotalFark]  

what_now: We would be far safer with a pack of beagles running around.

Rabid

beagles would still be safer.

20 Nov 2012 04:45 PM
lohphat    [TotalFark]  

vpb: And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers who voluntarily applied for that line of work for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.


FTFY

20 Nov 2012 05:04 PM
clyph     

vpb: I don't know where this idea that there is some sort of right to photography comes from


It's called the Constitution, dumbass. Freedom of the Press. Look it up.

20 Nov 2012 05:09 PM
Godscrack     
Stick some Milk Duds between your cheeks.

Just in case they do a butt check.

20 Nov 2012 05:10 PM
Jument     

lohphat: vpb: And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers who voluntarily applied for that line of work for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.

FTFY


People gotta eat.

20 Nov 2012 05:13 PM
Smeggy Smurf     

Godscrack: Stick some Milk Duds between your cheeks.

Just in case they do a butt check.


No. Just shiat on them. You can always claim you poop easily when you're about to be raped

20 Nov 2012 05:13 PM
hdhale     
Just step into the mother farking booth already. The rest of us have planes to farking catch.

20 Nov 2012 05:13 PM
what_now    [TotalFark]  

hdhale: Just step into the mother farking booth already. The rest of us have planes to farking catch.


No. I already had cancer at age 21. I'd rather not go through that again.

20 Nov 2012 05:16 PM
LeroyBourne     

hdhale: Just step into the mother farking booth already. The rest of us have planes to farking catch.


Listen to this person citizens! Now move along.

20 Nov 2012 05:18 PM
OrangeSnapper     

hdhale: Just step into the mother farking booth already. The rest of us have planes to farking catch.


Move to the back of the bus, biatch. Some of us are trying to go somewhere. Protest in private where no one will notice, like a good American.

20 Nov 2012 05:19 PM
mark12A     
Just step into the mother farking booth already. The rest of us have planes to farking catch.

I have NEVER "stepped into the booth". I'm a frequent flyer (couple million miles over my career) and I refuse to be scanned.

/add a little oil and the gropings become quite pleasant....
//used to get groped flying in the third world long before 9/11

20 Nov 2012 05:20 PM
lohphat    [TotalFark]  

Jument: lohphat: vpb: And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers who voluntarily applied for that line of work for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.

FTFY

People gotta eat.


Work at McDonalds. 50% employee discount.

Holding the p-lamp is a more nobler profession than the TSA.

20 Nov 2012 05:20 PM
Theaetetus     

hdhale: Just step into the mother farking booth already. The rest of us have planes to farking catch.


Maybe you should plan ahead and get to the airport a little earlier then, mmkay?

20 Nov 2012 05:22 PM
blatz514    [TotalFark]  
There are always a couple hotties working at the airport I use. Maybe I'll ask one of them if they wanna get their picture taken with me.

20 Nov 2012 05:22 PM
Twilight Farkle    [TotalFark]  

Walker: "We will no longer allow the TSA to stick their hands down our pants

Solution: drop pants.
[img.photobucket.com image 600x522]


And if two people do it, in harrrrrrrrrmony...

20 Nov 2012 05:25 PM
jigger     

vpb: I don't know where this idea that there is some sort of right to photography comes from.


Really? Are you seriously asking this question?

20 Nov 2012 05:25 PM
Popcorn Johnny     
Simple solution, don't fly if you don't like the rules.

20 Nov 2012 05:26 PM
FTGodWin     

Jument: lohphat: vpb: And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers who voluntarily applied for that line of work for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.

FTFY

People gotta eat.


I know lots of criminals who feel exactly the same way.

/ just because a job pays, doesn't mean a decent person should take it
// scumbags, OTOH...

20 Nov 2012 05:26 PM
KrispyKritter     

Smeggy Smurf: Godscrack: Stick some Milk Duds between your cheeks.

Just in case they do a butt check.

No. Just shiat on them. You can always claim you poop easily when you're about to be raped


sorry! i'm a nervous pooer! oopsie, my bad. that is awesome.

can a traveler insist on full voluntary nudity? i'm a big fat disgusting slob that has no second thoughts of disrobing any time any where. watch TSA guy vomit & laugh simultaneously.

20 Nov 2012 05:27 PM
FTGodWin     

Popcorn Johnny: Simple solution, don't fly if you don't like the rules.

The

rules? You mean their rules.

Maybe if criminals didn't run the world, I would be a little more impressed with their rules. Until then, fark 'em, and their law.

/ quit flying in 1999

20 Nov 2012 05:29 PM
Godscrack     

Smeggy Smurf: Godscrack: Stick some Milk Duds between your cheeks.

Just in case they do a butt check.

No. Just shiat on them. You can always claim you poop easily when you're about to be raped


No. Pigs like shiat. Why turn them on?

20 Nov 2012 05:31 PM
COMALite J     

20 Nov 2012 05:34 PM
oakleym82     

vpb: I don't like TSA much, but I don't know where this idea that there is some sort of right to photography comes from. Just because it isn't a crime doesn't mean that they can't set rules in their own public facilities or have people who don't follow them thrown out of arrested for trespassing.

And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.


FTFY

And as for all the other troll bait, I'll bite. I'm a frequent flyer and usually just find these threads amusing. I've contributed in the past. Most recently I recounted my changed perspective on opting out. I used to opt out every time. Opting out proves nothing, the TSA trons just don't give a shiat. lohphat and scottydoesntknow may disagree, and I used to see things their way, but face it fellas, these farkers got the job from the back of a pizza box. If you have something to prove, write your congressman/congresswoman, senator, Obama, whoever. Every holiday season it's the same old shiat on TV, some grandma or 3 year old gets groped, and if there's a video they get their 15 minutes. Didn't change anything last year, won't change anything this year. And I'm a big fan of civil disobedience, but the handful of protesters are a drop in the bucket compared to the air-traveling public and this just won't get enough traction. How many more years are they going to delude themselves? We all agree this shiat is farking ridiculous, let's do something better than wasting everybody's time at the airport.

In the mean time I signed up for Global Entry so I can get TSA PreCheck and skip the pat-downs and naked body machines. Bring on the flame war citing how I've sold out by giving my fingerprints, retinal scan, background check, and information during the interview to Uncle Sam. But after it was all said and done it actually seems way more reasonable to me (PreCheck, redress numbers, Global Entry, etc.) than sending me through a farking mm wave or xray machine 50+ times a year.

/rant over

20 Nov 2012 05:36 PM
Popcorn Johnny     

FTGodWin: The rules? You mean their rules.


Same difference.

20 Nov 2012 05:36 PM
jjorsett     
Burns added that while the TSA, "does not prohibit photographs at screening locations, local laws, state statutes, or local ordinances may."

And are you going to get local cops involved in these incidents, or do you, a federal agency, plan on enforcing local and state laws?

20 Nov 2012 05:44 PM
mark12A     
In the mean time I signed up for Global Entry so I can get TSA PreCheck and skip the pat-downs and naked body machines. Bring on the flame war citing how I've sold out by giving my fingerprints, retinal scan, background check, and information during the interview to Uncle Sam. But after it was all said and done it actually seems way more reasonable to me (PreCheck, redress numbers, Global Entry, etc.) than sending me through a farking mm wave or xray machine 50+ times a year.

'cuse me, Pard, but Pre-check does not get you out of all scannings and gropings. They still scan/grope a certain percentage of Pre-check fliers. Especially if things is slow and they're bored.

20 Nov 2012 05:49 PM
bobtheallmighty     

oakleym82: vpb: I don't like TSA much, but I don't know where this idea that there is some sort of right to photography comes from. Just because it isn't a crime doesn't mean that they can't set rules in their own public facilities or have people who don't follow them thrown out of arrested for trespassing.

And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.

FTFY

And as for all the other troll bait, I'll bite. I'm a frequent flyer and usually just find these threads amusing. I've contributed in the past. Most recently I recounted my changed perspective on opting out. I used to opt out every time. Opting out proves nothing, the TSA trons just don't give a shiat. lohphat and scottydoesntknow may disagree, and I used to see things their way, but face it fellas, these farkers got the job from the back of a pizza box. If you have something to prove, write your congressman/congresswoman, senator, Obama, whoever. Every holiday season it's the same old shiat on TV, some grandma or 3 year old gets groped, and if there's a video they get their 15 minutes. Didn't change anything last year, won't change anything this year. And I'm a big fan of civil disobedience, but the handful of protesters are a drop in the bucket compared to the air-traveling public and this just won't get enough traction. How many more years are they going to delude themselves? We all agree this shiat is farking ridiculous, let's do something better than wasting everybody's time at the airport.

In the mean time I signed up for Global Entry so I can get TSA PreCheck and skip the pat-downs and naked body machines. Bring on the flame war citing how I've sold out by giving my fingerprints, retinal scan, background check, and information during the interview to Uncle Sam. But after it was all said and done it actually seems way more reasonable to me (PreCheck, redress numbers, Global Entry, etc.) than sending me through a farking mm wave or xray machine 50+ time ...




so just becasue your prechecked you can skip all the scans; Whats gonna stop someone from getting prechecked and blowing up a plane later on down the road?

Also I think I will continue to waste peoples time at the airport. Its kind of the point, it makes thoughs that want to get on the plane faster but dont care about their rights or the issues more pissed at the system. Maybe even make some mindless fark look a little deeper into it who might not have. Not to mention the fact that you allready get enough radation just from a flights, i dont want to add onto that, and I sure as hell dont want to give Uncle Sam my retnal scan.

20 Nov 2012 05:51 PM
OrangeSnapper     

oakleym82:
...
In the mean time I signed up for Global Entry so I can get TSA PreCheck and skip the pat-downs and naked body machines. Bring on the flame war citing how I've sold out by giving my fingerprints, retinal scan, background check, and information during the interview to Uncle Sam. But after it was all said and done it actually seems way more reasonable to me (PreCheck, redress numbers, Global Entry, etc.) than sending me through a farking mm wave or xray machine 50+ time ...


All of the Global Entry Pre-Check stuff doesn't seem to work when you're on an international itinerary, even if you are on a domestic leg of that trip. Since nearly 100% of my flights are to or from the US, the pre-check is never allowed for me, and I always have to try to dodge the nude-o-scopes or get felt up. Always, except when I fly out of Germany, where I go through security with my shoes on and without a strip search or feel-up.

20 Nov 2012 05:52 PM
Caradoc    [TotalFark]  

mark12A: They still scan/grope a certain percentage of Pre-check fliers. Especially if things is slow and they're bored.


And even more especially if they spot an iPod or an iPad they think they might get away with.

20 Nov 2012 05:52 PM
Kevin72     
I will always opt out and not go through the radiation machines. I've done the patdown half a dozen times. If they are going to be ridiculous with me, I will be ridiculous with them. I'm beginning to imagine them down on their knees feeling out my knees as them bowing down and worshipping me to wish me good luck on my flight. Passive-aggressive is still the best protest.

20 Nov 2012 06:02 PM
DownDaRiver     

Darth_Lukecash: scottydoesntknow: vpb: And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.

Fark yea I'm blaming the poorly paid low ranking workers now. There's no "Just following orders" with the TSA anymore. The workers know they work for a corrupt, shiatty organization, and still choose to work there. They add nothing of value and are more likely to take something of value away.

TSA workers use their job to cheat, steal, grope, steal, insult, steal, belittle, steal, etc. from people just trying to get from one place to another.

When a headline actually comes through FARK saying "TSA FINALLY STOPS A TERRORIST!" I will eat my words, but so far the only people to stop suspected terror plots are the actual passengers (shoe bomb guy comes to mind).

Here's a little article from Forbes on the difference betwen a private contractor company and the TSA on airport security: Link

TL/DR: SFO screeners processed 65% more passengers per screener than did their counterparts at LAX. That's not a typo: 65%. SFO screeners receive the same wages and benefits as those hired and managed by the TSA, and SFO uses virtually identical procedures and equipment. The difference is that the private contractor in San Francisco has no sense of entitlement or feeling of permanency. Competition works. There is far less turnover of screeners at SFO, and the contractor saves money by using part-timers (all fully trained, of course) to meet peak periods rather than keeping full-timers waiting around for periodic surges.

Do the Part timers get the same bennies? I think not...


How is that a counter point to the comment?

20 Nov 2012 06:02 PM
toraque    [TotalFark]  

scottydoesntknow: If you can't even qualify for a minimum wage job at a fast food place, why do they think it's a good idea to put them in charge of national security at airports?


This is a somewhat untrue assumption. I do actually know a guy who works fast food and was turned down by the TSA.

I recommended that he look there for a job, mainly since I don't really like him all that much and the idea of him having to fondle old dude's balls all day is farking hilarious, with the added benefit of having him almost universally reviled by everyone he comes into contact with in the course of his job.

As it turns out, he didn't meet the minimum criteria, whatever that is, but he runs a fry daddy so the bar for entry is at least above that.

20 Nov 2012 06:14 PM
Caradoc    [TotalFark]  

Kevin72: I'm beginning to imagine them down on their knees feeling out my knees as them bowing down and worshipping me to wish me good luck on my flight.


2.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size

20 Nov 2012 06:15 PM
Caradoc    [TotalFark]  

toraque: As it turns out, he didn't meet the minimum criteria, whatever that is, but he runs a fry daddy so the bar for entry is at least above that.


Maybe they found signs of a conscience and/or a soul during the TSA interview process. Seems to be the sole measure by which someone can be rejected by the TSA.

20 Nov 2012 06:16 PM
Smackledorfer     

vpb: I don't like TSA much, but I don't know where this idea that there is some sort of right to photography comes from. Just because it isn't a crime doesn't mean that they can't set rules in their own facilities or have people who don't follow them thrown out of arrested for trespassing.

And blaming poorly paid low ranking workers for decisions made in Washington is silly anyway.


It should be legal to take pictures of virtually everything in open view of people with lawful access to the point they are viewing from for the same reason those rules apply to police and their search exception to the 4th amendment: there is no right to privacy in these areas.

For private areas it should be up to the owners of the location whether or not they want to set rules to those on their property.

It isn't about a "right to photograph" it is about 'why should there be a restriction on taking a picture of something when there is not a restriction to viewing it'. Restrictions on freedom should have some basis. What is the basis for restricting filming?

20 Nov 2012 06:22 PM
ronaprhys     

Kevin72: I will always opt out and not go through the radiation machines. I've done the patdown half a dozen times. If they are going to be ridiculous with me, I will be ridiculous with them. I'm beginning to imagine them down on their knees feeling out my knees as them bowing down and worshipping me to wish me good luck on my flight. Passive-aggressive is still the best protest.


I also refuse any Ball-o-Scope scans. I get the morning or afternoon grope, basically waste time, and add in extra cost to the system. My only real issue that I'm usually getting the grope by a 45yo guy with a beer gut and a bad combover. Nor do I get the luxury of having any hot women getting the pat down near me. This needs to change.

20 Nov 2012 06:26 PM
Showing 1-50 of 103 comments
Refresh Page 2
View Comments:
This thread is closed to new comments.


Back To Main

More Headlines:
Main | Sports | Business | Geek | Entertainment | Politics | Video | FarkUs | Contests | Fark Party | Combined