Did TSA go to far?
- Thread starter Dino
- Start date
we're too sue happy already. the guy was disciplined, no harm, no foul. a lawsuit is not necessary, and it would speak volumes about ron paul's campaign people if they took the already fragile economy into account before serving someone with a needless lawsuit.
MelodicMetalGod
Registered
Anytime you take part in an activity in which your actions can have an impact on those around you, there is an implied privelege. That includes driving on public streets, owning a home in a given community, going out to eat in a public restaraunt and flying...in any plane going anywhere. As 9/11 demonstrated, giving the keys to the plane to the wrong folk(s) can have devastating consequences in short order. Therefore, IMHO, the privelege is this: You have the privelege to BUY a ticket for transport on a plane via that purchase you are agreeing to comply with accepted behavior standards, etc.
All that said, I don't see any reason to stop a guy b/c he has $4700 in cash. Neither do I see any reason for that guy not to answer the TSA's question regarding that cash...unless he's hiding something of being a smarta55.
k03gsxr750
Registered
If I walked into an airport with $9,999 dollars and was stopped and refused to answer and they dug something up from it don't you think it would tossed on a technicality anyway? Captain is right, just because it is a fair bit of money doesn't mean its up to TSA to play find the crime.
afterhours
Registered
there are real instances of rights being taken away.....
but we are looking at this guy that did everything he could to try and catch TSA doing something wrong.
if somebody working for Jesse Jackson did this, and claimed it was racism.....we would all laugh.
but because Bierendht is claiming civil rights violation we are all up in arms, because this is an important issue to us....but we are not seeing the forest thru the trees.
bierendht went there to cause a problem, he set this up and did everything he could to make it happen. he did this so he could record it and make a news story out of it.
i have no problem going after people that break the laws.....but this is not that. this is a guy with an agenda, trying to make something out of nothing...
but we are looking at this guy that did everything he could to try and catch TSA doing something wrong.
if somebody working for Jesse Jackson did this, and claimed it was racism.....we would all laugh.
but because Bierendht is claiming civil rights violation we are all up in arms, because this is an important issue to us....but we are not seeing the forest thru the trees.
bierendht went there to cause a problem, he set this up and did everything he could to make it happen. he did this so he could record it and make a news story out of it.
i have no problem going after people that break the laws.....but this is not that. this is a guy with an agenda, trying to make something out of nothing...
Projekt
Registered
I disagree with that synopsis. He replicated a scenario that many people must have already dealt with and been handled poorly by the TSA. The fact is that the TSA really does need to focus on issues relevant to the mission of transportation safety.
Why the fugg does $4,700 in cash become suspect under this safety umbrella? After all, it was not attached to a detonator, explosive residue or any other items that could by any stretch of the imagination create an in flight emergency.
Heck, maybe he wanted to proposition a hot flight attendant with the money. How would that affect passenger safety?
Their job is to keep flights safe. That is why they were created. They are not an investigative branch of the Justice department. Therefore, your argument is weak.
Because in 2006 US Court of Appeals ruled that possession of the large sum of cash is strong evidence of connection to drug activity. See Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime . TSA, same as any law enforcement agency, will always be looking for evidence of any crime, even if unrelated to their initial task.
That's why they were going to pass him to the police and DEA for the investigation. According to the above ruling, they spotted strong evidence of the drug crime, so they acted the same as if they discovered, for example, a human finger.
4700 is not a large sum of money....
Projekt
Registered
Exactly! Major crimes involve amounts way larger than that.
Again, why are they wasting time with the little fish?
chevellesteve
Registered
see my point about the supreme court
It was all about Drug Traffiking. I figured most knew that. I have to agree with your statements. I know years ago when bottles of liquids more than 3 or 4 ounces became an issue I was told by TSA I could dispose of about $20.00 worth of new travel items or leave the airport. So I dumped them and made my flight, went shopping on the other end. No, I wasn't happy. Yes, I was upset with myself for not keeping up with current security issues regarding flight.
I listened to the recording I linked last night and the only problems I had with it were: The first guy treating him less than professionally, and the first and second guy trying to coerce the guy into talking and obviously not being trained to handle themselves in the situation they found themselves.
I'm thinking if they had told him initially and they might have before he cranked up the iphone that he was under investigative detention they could have avoided paying a settlement :2cents:
I'm thinking if they had told him initially and they might have before he cranked up the iphone that he was under investigative detention they could have avoided paying a settlement :2cents:
afterhours
Registered
so after 5 pages of opinion.....the truth still remains the same. according to current law, TSA can question you for possessing laarge amounts of cash.
so while some may not like it....it is the law as set forth by the SUpreme Federal Court System of the United States of America, under the authority granted to by the US Constitution.
the same document that give the right to bear arm, and protest the government also give the government the authority to make laws, and allows the Supreme Court to inerpret those laws in real life.
so while some may not like it....it is the law as set forth by the SUpreme Federal Court System of the United States of America, under the authority granted to by the US Constitution.
the same document that give the right to bear arm, and protest the government also give the government the authority to make laws, and allows the Supreme Court to inerpret those laws in real life.
TSA can question you for anything they want. Actually, anyone can question you on anything, it's freedom of speech. It's another thing whether you must answer. These videos on the topic are highly recommended:
"Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane
"Don't Talk to the Police" by Officer George Bruch
More to the matter, TSA has no defined criteria on whom they can bar from the flight. As I understand, they can bar anybody and because of any reason, including their pure gut feeling, with or without questioning. They now have behavioral experts who are looking at peoples' faces, so I'd think if such expert detects a threat, they can bar you from the flight as well, and you won't be able to dispute it.
We don't know why they stopped him - only because of cash, or cash plus something else. They probably base their suspicions on several factors, including facial expressions. There's no law on that, it can be totally their gut feeling, and they have full rights to question him and bar him from the flight for any reason or without any reason at all, without any explanations. Lots of people have been barred from flights because they were put in no-flight lists, and there's no way to find out why, nor dispute it somehow.
TSA then invited police officer, who apparently have been trained by DEA to look for "unusually large amounts of cash" as evidence of drug activity. Again, there's no definition of what is "large", and no threshold. At this point the best course was not playing the game "I don't know the law, please help me", but refusing to talk without attorney and not buying the threats about being taken to the "station". I think the police officer realized that the amount was too small for that, but was trying to scare Steve by "station" and DEA in order to make him talk to TSA. Still, technically it was possible that they would actually arrest him for drug trafficking, seize the cash, and the jury would find him guilty basing only on the cash presence. The precedent with Gonzoles makes it possible.
Similar threads
