Hacker News Reader

Comment by awinter-py | Hacker News Reader

Man am I lucky to be a twerpy white guy (some days).

When I travel I opt out of the scanner every time, ask the pat-down guy what happens if he finds drugs on me, and sometimes refuse the search by asking them if I'm under arrest ('if not, am I free to go?').

If the TSA agent won't let me leave without a search, I demand they call the cops, who are obligated to let me leave (not enter the airport, though) because I haven't committed a crime.

One time in SFO they called the bomb squad because I tested positive for fertilizer (or something) and I still went through all this. I refused something called a 'private room crotch rub', which I regret a little.

When I talk to friends who are any shade of brown they tell me 'you should have had your ass handed to you'.

View on HN

You'd have a similar problem when you would visit certain places where "twerpy white guy" caused the same suspicion. I'd say you can be grateful that those places are unlikely to be on your travel list.

> and sometimes refuse the search by asking them if I'm under arrest ('if not, am I free to go?') ... If the TSA agent won't let me leave without a search, I demand they call the cops, who are obligated to let me leave

Can you elaborate on the utility of this? I currently opt for the pat down and refuse the private search ("no, I'd rather do this in the open for everyone to see"), and generally end at that. Are you further describing what you do if something is found in the pat-down that you don't want escalated to the police, or what?

My whole thought process? It's security theater so there's not a lot of case law. Therefore I can do whatever I want. I'm just exploring the boundaries. If the GAO can get weapons in 19 times out of twenty, if bruce schneier can bring in a beer belly full of gasoline, and I'm still forced to go through the process, I'm sure as heck going to have some fun with it.

Sure, but you make it sound as if the end result is you leaving the airport and not boarding a plane. Are you deliberately spending time/money just to fuck with the TSA and not actually fly, or what?

No, once they say 'okay you can leave' I consent to the search and proceed to make my flight. If I'm challenging anything it's the idea that I can't leave until the search is complete.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. So you're just using time that they've already wasted by your arriving at the airport hours early.

I just assert myself during the process, but leave escalation up to them (like the time some goon-manager decided to re-search me after I was already in the process of reassembling myself).

BTW what do they say happens if they find drugs during one of the pat-downs? Since you mentioned SFO, have you found the answers/process/etc varies between there and TSA airports?

Is SFO not a TSA airport? Didn't know that.

They say various stuff. They're training these guys better now and usually they're like 'do you have any?'. In the old days they'd say scary things like 'oh we have friends who deal with that' or 'I can't tell you our policies'.

In my experience (sparse data here) california pat-down guys were the friendliest, sharing my take on the absurdity of the process and willing to go with whatever. My worst experience was with the chicago cops; they sided at first with the TSA manager and I think I came close to being arrested. I also tried to record them and that didn't go well.

JFK and LGA 'male assists' are serious about their jobs but also cognizant of the law. Once the cops get involved in new york, the situation feels controlled and safe to me.

You do realize that regardless of you being "right" legally that someday things might go "wrong" right?

Compliance isn't without its risks. At minimum I'm looking at a soliciation bust if I ever say yes to that private room crotch rub.

Funny, way more humor than me.

More likely that someone that's "had enough" with "people like you" would "magically" find something in your bag, say that you made statements that you did not, etc.

Be careful.

this reminds me of that white guy that was tweeting up a storm getting on a plane with his leatherman pocket knife thing and also exchanging lolstories with other white people about getting through airport security with questionable items.

The problem with framing things in terms of "privilege" is that it creates a race to the bottom.

No, it's a damned right to not be disassembled, scrutinized, and groped just to move about. Instead of nipping at the people whose rights are being violated the least, recognize that you're both fundamentally trying to help the people whose rights are being violated the most.

You're THAT guy.

You go out of your way to be a dick to people doing their jobs because you feel the need to prove some point in the most obtuse way.

If their job is to invade my privacy and restrict my liberty then I don't feel obligated to be polite to them. I'm not sure if that makes me a bad person, but I'm certain that the Nazis were all just doing their jobs.

The TSA isn't violating your privacy or liberty. You have the option to not fly, or to charter your own aircraft if you don't want to be subjected to TSA. Your anger is misplaced. Maybe direct it at your representatives, or your fellow voters for doing such a poor job at electing representatives.

You may have a point, but I don't know how else to act. I live in a community where 30% of respondents oppose flag burning, 20% support the right to do it, and the other half will agree with either side depending on how the question is framed. So 'patriotism' is a mixed up concept with two sides.

In my case, I oppose the forces of chaos by making a fuss about search without probable cause. I recognize the social cost of acting this way, but it's not in my personality to blindly consent.

I don't disagree with you on the policy, but the way you're protesting it is pretty ineffective. Writing a letter will do more good than wasting the time of the lowest paid employees at the airport.

I can't justify making someone else's day more shitty (the employee who has to deal with this and the people behind you in line) and changing nothing just to make myself feel better.

I've drafted letters twice but haven't sent them. The first time, the snowden / prism stuff hit the news between writing and having a web connection, and I couldn't bring myself to hit send.

The second time I tried using the TSA web feedback form but it crashed when I hit submit.

awinter-py is providing them on-the-job training.

It's their job to politely deal with a traveller who declines a suspicion-free search. If that "makes their day shitty", they're in the wrong line of work.

You can decide on any evil/stupid policy as long as you secure yourself with a layer of people hired to carry out your plan. This way no one can do anything about it, because:

* People actually doing wrong things are 'just doing their jobs'. They are also underpaid, with no job security, so only a bad person would make their job even harder.

* Ones who order them are not actually doing anything wrong. It doesn't help that you often can't find the person responsible up in the chain of command.

So it works as intended.

A lot of people are doing their jobs. Does it make a difference if I pay somebody to be the metaphorical Westboro Baptist Church of government nuisance?

Good and bad should be evaluated independently from, "I'm just doing my job here." No, nobody is ever just doing their job. We're all affecting each other, for better, worse, and all gray things inbetween.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com