How can we punish the TSA Gate Rapers?

[mhaze]

....one of the two egregious TSA policies involves the unwanted touching of my junk, that makes all TSA screeners who enforce that policy molesters, and all the ones who abuse children in that way child molesters. The other policy makes them pornographers......
.....

Okay, just briefly looking at some of the laws at the state level, it's interesting that there are exclusions or "affirmative defenses" to sexual battery if the offender is a medical person such as a doctor.

There is no such exclusion for TSA agents.

 

[Buckyball]

Just scream, "OW!!" when they touch you!

Seriously, I know it sounds ridiculous... and it will be embarrassing for you...

But I suggest: yell "OW!!!!" at the top of your lungs every time they touch you. Maybe even work up some tears, if you can. Otherwise, remain perfectly calm... except for screaming "OW!!!!" in your most blood-curdling voice.

If 1 out of 5 of us did this for a few months, all of this would go away.

 

[mhaze]

Try just distributing information to help people in opting out: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193915

Good work!

 

[bokonon]

So parents have the equally abhorrent choice of whether they and their kids get porn scanned, or fondled. How generous of you. Turning this form of abuse or the alternative into a condition of what used to be our right to travel freely by air isn't exactly a "choice".

When I take my kids to the doctor, they're both (to use your absurd terminology) porn scanned and groped. It isn't a form of abuse.

Really? You'd have no issues regarding someone with salacious intent groping your kid, as long as you're there to observe? You may have some issues.

If I observe salacious conduct, I'll have a problem, and the TSA agent will probably end up reprimanded if not fired. The idea that some child molester is going to indulge himself in full view of a hostile public is ridiculous, except in the minds of hysterical Puritans.

You're the one who's paranoid - of terrorist attack.

Nope. I'd be happy to dispense with even the metal detectors, save the time and the money, and let the occasional mid-air explosion (if any) be an insurance problem, just as it's an insurance problem when a trucker falls asleep and drives into oncoming traffic.

Well, OK, not “convicted”, and alas, probably won't be; but here's at least one documented case of a child being blatantly molested by a TSA agent. By definition, that make this agent a child molester, even if he hasn't been prosecuted as such.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfmoms/detail?entry_id=77140

No more video there, but I found the video elsewhere, and it's nowhere near a case of "blatantly molested". The kid is being held by her mother, she's kicking and screaming, while the female TSA agent is patting her legs.

My kid has been known to scream that way when getting a flu shot. It's not abuse, it's not molestation, it's just somebody doing their job.

 

[mhaze]

When I take my kids to the doctor, they're both (to use your absurd terminology) porn scanned and groped. It isn't a form of abuse.....

My kid has been known to scream that way when getting a flu shot. It's not abuse, it's not molestation, it's just somebody doing their job.

Post 381.

 

[bokonon]

Post 381.

An empty claim, with no evidence. Quote the statutes in the states where doctors doing their jobs need legislative exemptions from sexual battery charges, and I'll address them.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

An empty claim, with no evidence. Quote the statutes in the states where doctors doing their jobs need legislative exemptions from sexual battery charges, and I'll address them.

There is no equivalence between a doctor handling a patient, and a TSA pervert molesting a passenger.

Yes, in order to do his job, a doctor might have to view or touch a patient in an intimate manner, that would be considered intrusive. There's no way around this. A doctor's job is to maintain and repair a human body, and to do this, he has to be able to view and touch that which he is maintaining. It is not possible for a doctor's job to be performed without this viewing and handling. If you require the services of a doctor, if you wish to receive these services, you have to accept the touching and viewing that the doctor has no choice but to do in order to render the service you are receiving.

Being molested in such a manner has nothing to do with traveling. There is nothing about the safe and proper operation of an aircraft or other mass-transit vehicle that requires molesting the passengers in the manner that the TSA has been doing. It is perfectly possible to get passengers aboard an aircraft, fly that aircraft to its destination, and unload the passengers there, without subjecting the passengers to any form of molestation or voyeurism such as the TSA is doing. There is no reason why, as a condition of traveling, one ought to be obligated to submit to any such molestation.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

No more video there, but I found the video elsewhere, and it's nowhere near a case of "blatantly molested". The kid is being held by her mother, she's kicking and screaming, while the female TSA agent is patting her legs.

The child is being touched in an intimate manner that the child clearly does not want to be touched, by a stranger who has no legitimate reason to be touching that child in that manner, and the child is very vocally objecting to being so touched. There is no rational way to argue that this does not constitute molestation of that child. In any other context, this would be fully recognized for what it truly is—a criminal act of child molestation for which the perpetrator should be arrested, and spend a long time in prison.

 

[mhaze]

Can you believe it. Some people on the Internet trying to tell others how they should feel about being scanned and gropes.

Now how do we punish gate rapers?

 

[bokonon]

The man on the street, of course, could be arrested for this, and on conviction, spend a fair amount of time in prison and thereafter be required for the rest of his life to be registered as a “sex offender”. There is absolutely no justification for allowing TSA agents to engage in this same conduct, without facing the same consequences.

Citizen's arrest! Citizen's arrest!

There is no equivalence between a doctor handling a patient, and a TSA pervert molesting a passenger.

Yes, in order to do his job, a doctor might have to view or touch a patient in an intimate manner, that would be considered intrusive.

The AMA pervert.

The child is being touched in an intimate manner that the child clearly does not want to be touched, by a stranger who has no legitimate reason to be touching that child in that manner, and the child is very vocally objecting to being so touched. There is no rational way to argue that this does not constitute molestation of that child. In any other context, this would be fully recognized for what it truly is—a criminal act of child molestation for which the perpetrator should be arrested, and spend a long time in prison.

You know, I think I'm starting to enjoy flying a bit more already, just knowing that Beck's Puritans and their screaming brats are less likely to be boarding the plane with me.

Can you believe it. Some people on the Internet trying to tell others how they should feel about being scanned and gropes.

Now how do we punish gate rapers?

Citizen's arrest! Citizen's arrest!

 

[Belz...]

There is no equivalence between a doctor handling a patient, and a TSA pervert molesting a passenger.

When you phrase it that way, sure. Phrase it the other way around, and you might see how it doesn't really prove anything.

I agree with the rest of your post, however, about the relevance of such procedures.

 

[mhaze]

When you phrase it that way, sure. Phrase it the other way around, and you might see how it doesn't really prove anything.
.....

Actually that seems incorrect - statutes I looked up EXCLUDE MDs' from sexual battery charges using what's called an "affirmative defense" so the standard of proof and evidence would be far higher to convict or even have a DA bring the doc up for charges. The TSA agent doesn't have those advantages.

 

[Belz...]

Actually that seems incorrect - statutes I looked up EXCLUDE MDs' from sexual battery charges using what's called an "affirmative defense" so the standard of proof and evidence would be far higher to convict or even have a DA bring the doc up for charges. The TSA agent doesn't have those advantages.

How surprising. Mhaze misses the point.

 

[Meed]

Now how do we punish gate rapers?

Rape their gates. Eye for an eye and all..

 

[mhaze]

There is no equivalence between a doctor handling a patient, and a TSA pervert molesting a passenger.

When you phrase it that way, sure. Phrase it the other way around, and you might see how it doesn't really prove anything.

There is no equivalence between a doctor pervert molesting a patient, and a TSA handling a passenger.


Fraid I don't see any point that I missed. My comment was that the legal standard of proof at the state level protects the doctor, and that the TSA agent has no such protection against misbehavior.

But please do enlighten me(us).

 

[Squid]

I can think of one thing to do... don't have a nudity taboo and go through the scanner.

 

[tkmikkelsen]

Isn't the problem with airport security really that it never or rarely catches anyone and it is still pretty easily circumvented if you really wanted to.
Most terrorist are not just people that gets a sudden impulse to blow a plan up. They are people who plan it carefully and will certainly find a way to get around the security systems that are in place today.

You can take a look at the scenario presented here http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyin...s-one-with-a-rectal-bomb…-this-is-not-a-typo/ to me it sounds like a plausible scenario and something that could be done.

The only thing that you do with airport security today is to harass a lot of law abiding citizen just so that some can get the illusion of safety. I will not be the one to judge if that is a good trade off (I believe Ben Franklin already said something about this a long time ago), but if the terrorists aim is to hurt us where it really hurts, namely on the wallet, then they are succeeding. We are spending more money and time (and time is money, right) on airport security than we have ever done before.

I have heard some say that airport security is not there catch terrorist, but to prevent them from trying, that always reminds of the following joke.

Psychiatrist: Why do you keep whistling all the time?
Patient: To keep the tigers away.
Psychiatrist: We are in Denver, Colorado there are no tigers for thousands of miles.
Patient: See how well it works.

 

[Belz...]

There is no equivalence between a doctor handling a patient, and a TSA pervert molesting a passenger.

When you phrase it that way, sure. Phrase it the other way around, and you might see how it doesn't really prove anything.

There is no equivalence between a doctor pervert molesting a patient, and a TSA handling a passenger.


Fraid I don't see any point that I missed. My comment was that the legal standard of proof at the state level protects the doctor, and that the TSA agent has no such protection against misbehavior.

But please do enlighten me(us).

Oh, it's just you.

The original comment was meant to say that, when TSA agents do what doctors do, they molest. But it's just Bob's wording that makes it that way. In both cases there is nothing illegal going on, I think. It doesn't mean I agree with the new policies.

 

[mhaze]

Oh, it's just you.

The original comment was meant to say that, when TSA agents do what doctors do, they molest. But it's just Bob's wording that makes it that way. In both cases there is nothing illegal going on, I think. ....

I got that, and I understood Bob's point of view. You might want to check the state level laws, and you'd find that in some states, he was right. Not all. That's what I did, briefly, and found the notable affirmative defense for doctors.

So it's a bit more complex, isn't it?

 

[bokonon]

Post 386.