Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pilot Stands Up To TSA And Refuses Full Body Scan  
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10930 posts, RR: 37
Posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30731 times:

This is his recount.

My name is Michael Roberts, and I am a pilot for ExpressJet Airlines, Inc., based in Houston (that is, I still am for the time being). This morning as I attempted to pass through the security line for my commute to work I was denied access to the secured area of the terminal building at Memphis International Airport.

Read the full story here
http://www.expressjetpilots.com/the-...d.php?39523-Well-today-was-the-day

My big Kudos to the pilot. He has my support.
I will do the exact same thing if asked to go through one of these.

I hope he will be able to keep his job.


There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
164 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8913 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30746 times:

Quoting MadameConcorde (Thread starter):
My big Kudos to the pilot. He has my support.
I will do the exact same thing if asked to go through one of these.

I hope he will be able to keep his job.

Amen...I'm behind him standing up to TSA bullying 100% of the time.

I will never go through one of the radiation spreading machines - they've tried and I say loud enough so that my other passengers hear me (and hopefully pick up on my cue) "I OPT OUT". We need more people to stand up to this and hopefully this theatre will disappear.


User currently offlinea340crew From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 279 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30609 times:

Anyone can refuse the body scanner and get a traditional pat down search in its place. But if you refuse the body scanner you are subject to the secondary screening you dont just get to walk through the medal detector. Everyone is subject to to the same security screening and rules if you are a passenger or pilot or flight attendant. This pilot should have been a lot more profesional, since the TSA is working to protect him and his flight. I am a pilot and have been subject to many pat down searches. He had no right to refuse it. If he did not want the secondary searchhe should of went through the body scanner. If he didnt want to go throught the scanner the pat down search is something that comes with it.As a pilot you want to know that all the passengers on your flight have been screened to be best ability so why should you not be subject to it?

User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30513 times:

Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 1):
Amen...I'm behind him standing up to TSA bullying 100% of the time.
Quoting MadameConcorde (Thread starter):
My big Kudos to the pilot. He has my support.

Some people think they are above the rules or that rules only pertain to other people.


User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30476 times:

Quoting a340crew (Reply 2):
He had no right to refuse it.

Of course he has a right ot refuse it! You can't be serious. He refused and they asked to pat him down and he refused that as well. How is that not his right?



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinedl767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30476 times:

Not everyone has the same feelings about these body scanners. Personally I prefer them seeing a slightly revealing x-ray looking photo of me to the much more invasive pat down you get if you opt put. Having a TSA agent rub his hands all over me is much more invasive than just a picture which will be looked at for maybe 10 seconds and I'll probably never see the person again.

User currently onlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30431 times:

Quoting a340crew (Reply 2):
Anyone can refuse the body scanner and get a traditional pat down search in its place.

I get patted down going into Jets games, what's the big deal. You don't want the scan, take the pat down. This pilot was in some sort of mood that definitely escalated the situation, if he had taken the pat down he would have been on his way to work. Instead, he's jammed up and might lose his job.

Again, being patted down going into concerts or sporting events is something that has been going on for years, even before the last ten years of heightened terrorist alerts. The pilot would have been subject to a pat down, not a strip search. They would not be touching skin nor genitalia, so obviously this individual has some bigger issues that the company he works for should look into further to see if he is stable enough to continue his duties.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5343 posts, RR: 23
Reply 7, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30406 times:

It is his right to refuse it. (I mean the body scanner.)

But if he refuses it, they must ask him to submit to a pat down -- alternative search.

It his his right to refuse that.

But if he refuses that, then they MUST refuse him entry to the secured area.

He knows this and he isn't above the rules. There is nothing heroic about his conduct.

This is the wrong place to address what is basically a political issue.

[Edited 2010-10-17 09:20:40]

User currently offlineNASBWI From Bahamas, joined Feb 2005, 1320 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 30400 times:

The only thing that strikes me as odd is that he also refused secondary screening. I know that normally, uniformed crewmembers aren't subject to secondary screening, but that doesn't mean that they are exempt from it. It would appear that this situation escalated because of Mr. Roberts' non-compliance with a TSA directive, followed by his argumentative stance regarding the situation.

Mr. Roberts then goes off on a tangent with the Police officer due to his admittedly "chatty" nature about civil liberties. For heaven's sake, they were going to pat him down, not send him to the gallows!

It's not that I don't have sympathy for what he had to go through, and yes, TSA isn't generally known for their social skills in handling the public. However, since he has such a great memory of what happened, would it have been such a huge inconvenience to simply be patted down, and grieve it later with Chief Pilot, Airport Authority, and whoever else it may concern?



Fierce, Fabulous, and Flawless ;)
User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30287 times:

Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 1):
I will never go through one of the radiation spreading machines - they've tried and I say loud enough so that my other passengers hear me (and hopefully pick up on my cue) "I OPT OUT". We need more people to stand up to this and hopefully this theatre will disappear.

Drawing attention to yourself in that sort of manner doesn't help. Such behavior is more likely to cause extra scrutiny by the TSA and possibly the local law enforcement agencies.

Quoting MadameConcorde (Thread starter):

I hope he will be able to keep his job.

He honestly shouldn't keep his job since going through security screening is part of the job and is not something they can opt out of. If you don't want to go through a full-body scanner, then don't raise a fuss when they have to do extra screening on you. Going through airport security is something all of us who have access to the sterile areas of the airport (be it as an employee or as a passenger) have to deal with.

While I'm not a big fan of the TSA, people need to remember that flying is a privilege, not a right. If you don't want to be subject to the security screenings, then don't fly. If you choose to fly, and you don't want to be screened using a certain method, you can opt out of that method and be screened using an alternative method. But don't complain about being subject to it because you opted out of being screened using a certain method.

I have no issues with being subject to any sort of security screening. I've yet to have to be subject to one of the full body scanners, but would not have any issues to being screened using such a device. I'll do whatever it takes to get me through security in as timely of a manner as possible. Going through airport security is one of the lowlights of any trip, so the quicker I'm through with it, the better.

[Edited 2010-10-17 09:15:58]

User currently offlineSMFBase From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30255 times:

Not sure what the pilot thought was going to happen after he refused both screenings. I choose not to believe that he thought the TSA would let him through after denying both screenings. You just can't be that ignorant as an airline pilot. Yeah, he has the right to deny screening, but he does not have the right to pass through security and fly an aircraft (or be a passenger) without passing either one of these screenings.

User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8913 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30243 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 9):
Drawing attention to yourself in that sort of manner doesn't help. Such behavior is more likely to cause extra scrutiny by the TSA and possibly the local law enforcement agencies.

I respectfully disagree. Any retaliatory screening by TSA is illegal. I am not breaking a law by saying loudly that I opt out (and by default hoping my other passengers notice and follow my lead).

My goal is to raise awareness amongst the flying public that they can refuse to undergo the nude-o-scope. Passing out pamphlets is a lot of work for something that won't be paid attention to. Boldly proclaiming "I OPT OUT" will get passengers attention and hopefully they'll choose to opt out as well.


User currently offlineQuokka From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30234 times:

As much as I hate being forced to strip (OK, I exaggerate) I believe that everybody should be subject to the same rules. While it may appear "obvious" that airline staff are not going to do something stupid and place themselves at risk, the same argument applies to the majority of passengers.
The biggest threat in any security system is complacency and the belief that aircrew are safe is part of that complacency. What is to prevent a member of the crew bringing a devise on board and then excusing him/herself due to a sudden bout of gastro? The crew member need not even be motivated by any ideal (jihad or any other) but simply been paid to bring a device on board in exchange for paying off their gambling debts. Far fetched, maybe. But possible.
In these days of enhanced security at the gate, how much greater is the risk presented by people on the ground? Not wishing to cast a doubt, but how serious is the vetting of baggage handlers, refuelers, etc taken? Again, I am not casting any aspersions, but to me it would seem obvious that people who want to kill others, don't necessarily wish to kill themselves.


User currently offlineWildcatYXU From Canada, joined May 2006, 2659 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30127 times:

Quoting dl767captain (Reply 5):
Not everyone has the same feelings about these body scanners. Personally I prefer them seeing a slightly revealing x-ray looking photo of me to the much more invasive pat down you get if you opt put.

Well, I have a similar attitude towards the body scanners as you do, however the technology is too new and we simply can't know the negative impact of the radiation used on our health. Since I fly a bit, I try to reduce the irradiation caused by the scans. So if I was trough the scanner in last 4 weeks, I opt for patdown. Otherwise, scanner here I go!

I have an additional problem with this, however. The CATSA agents in YXU didn't explain to me (or to other passengers) that there is another officer somewhere inside who will see our naked picture and that the picture is created by radiation. They were painting the picture of the scanner as something that is way better for you than the patdown. I think that's patently wrong and the traveling public has the right to know how the scanner works and that there may be some risk involved.
Not everybody is an aviation buff knowing a little bit about the technology before it was even deployed.


User currently offlinepropjock04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30130 times:

What I find interesting is that at hundreds of airports across the country passengers and crew members are passing through metal detectors only, but the second the TSA installs the full-body scan machine then it is necessary to conduct a pat down in addition to the metal detector if you "opt out."

User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30130 times:

Quoting Quokka (Reply 12):
The crew member need not even be motivated by any ideal (jihad or any other) but simply been paid to bring a device on board in exchange for paying off their gambling debts. Far fetched, maybe



Not at all. When getting investigated for a top secret security clearance, debt is one of the first things that's looked at. Based on the type/how much/ratio, it is not uncommon to be refused. The 'general' thinking is that you may be tempted to sell information to pay of said debt.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineCoachClass From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 452 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30084 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 6):
They would not be touching skin nor genitalia




The underwear bomber had the explosives in his briefs, so to detect this wouldn't the screener have to "grope" the genitals to determine what's in the shorts????

I'm really conflicted over this issue. I was dead set against this offensive practice of using technology to see under my clothes until this last summer boarding a LH flight from FRA to MIA, I saw a woman completely covered from head to toe with just a slit open over her eyes, over which she wore dark-I think prescription- glasses. I had been reading about the use of women wearing similar garb to conceal explosives and I was somewhat apprehensive seeing her board ahead of me. I actually think if I had the choice, I might have switched flights. How they checked her out is unknown.

But the profile of a bomber as I understand it is really young men from 18 to 35, regardless of marital status. Having children, good jobs, education are not impediments to them being suicide bombers; Richard Reed-shoe bomber, the Underwear bomber, Times Square bomber.


User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30052 times:

Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 11):

I respectfully disagree. Any retaliatory screening by TSA is illegal. I am not breaking a law by saying loudly that I opt out (and by default hoping my other passengers notice and follow my lead).

My goal is to raise awareness amongst the flying public that they can refuse to undergo the nude-o-scope. Passing out pamphlets is a lot of work for something that won't be paid attention to. Boldly proclaiming "I OPT OUT" will get passengers attention and hopefully they'll choose to opt out as well.

If you want to raise awareness, that is not the way to do it. What if some police officer were to witness you "boldly proclaiming" that you opt out and thinks that you're causing a disturbance and pulls you aside? Others may witness your actions and think that perhaps you shouldn't be allowed past security and report you to the whatever authorities they feel should be called. The security screening line is not the place to be rocking the boat. So unless you want to be like the guy that got detained for writing "Kip Hawley Is An Idiot" on a Ziplock bag, perhaps you should look at alternate means to raise awareness.

Like I said earlier, if you don't like the security screening methods being used, then don't fly. Flying is a privilege, not a right.


User currently offlineTigerguy From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 30034 times:

Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 11):
I am not breaking a law by saying loudly that I opt out (and by default hoping my other passengers notice and follow my lead).

But if you are given three options (full-body scan, pat-down, leave the airport) and you refuse the first, you're then left with the latter two. If you don't like the sound of the third, then the second would be the way to go. I think this pilot should have cooled down a bit and taken the middle road. This isn't a case of another hallmark of liberty being wrenched from the average American...just another minor inconvenience.

And finally...I have nothing against wanting to opt out of the full-body scan. I just hope they're behind me so they don't hold up my pass through security.  

[Edited 2010-10-17 09:36:21]


Flying friendly for a while, but is that a widget I see in the rear-view mirror?
User currently offlineNASBWI From Bahamas, joined Feb 2005, 1320 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 29948 times:

Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 11):
My goal is to raise awareness amongst the flying public that they can refuse to undergo the nude-o-scope. Passing out pamphlets is a lot of work for something that won't be paid attention to. Boldly proclaiming "I OPT OUT" will get passengers attention and hopefully they'll choose to opt out as well.

Fair enough, although I have to side with srbmod in that I don't think causing a disturbance in the terminal (however effective) is the best course of action to gain awareness. Also, consider the general traveling public. There may be many who fly often and will know exactly what you're talking about. The exact opposite can be said for those who travel infrequently or never before. Your ranting in the terminal will only incite more confusion to those travelers and cause a bigger headache than is necessary. Perhaps one can petition the airport authorities to post signage and/or other reminders right before the security entrance, informing travelers that passage through body scanners is not mandatory.

How does what you're trying to do relate to what the pilot in the article did? He opted out, and the TSA respected that. The problems really started when he refused secondary screening. Would you be telling the general public that they should refuse any form of security screening next?

[Edited 2010-10-17 09:44:23]


Fierce, Fabulous, and Flawless ;)
User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5569 posts, RR: 36
Reply 20, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 29910 times:

Where is the problem with these body scanners? This pilot should be dismissed at once.

User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 29852 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 17):
The security screening line is not the place to be rocking the boat. So unless you want to be like the guy that got detained for writing "Kip Hawley Is An Idiot" on a Ziplock bag, perhaps you should look at alternate means to raise awareness.



Weather it was right or wrong is not something we can say. I understand where you are coming from though; as you are merely suggesting that he raise awareness in other ways but I must agree that something has to give. Apparently writing letters does not work so alternate action needs to be taken.

About a month ago I had just arrived at in ATL on a flight and was waiting for the "Plane Train" and decided to snap a few photos of the station (was going to be part of my TR). This female TSO came up to me and asked if I just took a picture. I already knew where it was going so I just kind of said yes and kept on minding my own business. She then walked in front of me and asked if I took any more pictures while I was in the airport and my response was of course. She then said "You can't take pictures in the airport." I was like what?? I then turned to her and asked her to sight the regulation that says I can't take pictures while in an airport and she couldn't . The train pulled up and I just walked away and she then followed me on. I asked her if there was a problem and she said she has to contact a supervisor because they will have to take a look at the pictures I took. I asked her if she was detaining me at baggage claim and she said no. Couldn't hear the conversation on the phone but they must have told her to piss off because I just walked off the train and took my last parting shot of the little girl with her hands up in the mural above the escalator. She didn't follow.

I must say I wasn't exactly nice in my tone with her and I've always been one to "back" the TSA but until you are provoked people won't understand. I was VERY ready to have them 'detain' me because she was inclined to look through my camera on the stop and I was going to refuse. Would it have been easier to just le her so I could be on my way? Sure. But that's not how I see it. I won't give them any more than they deserve or I think I should have.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3592 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 29786 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm not understanding why we screen pilots for explosives and weapons when the pilot has a far better weapon available when he/she arrives at the gate: The aircraft itself, and in somecases a firearm.

Wouldn't it be smarter to do a thorough prehire background check on pilots and then do an identity check before allowing them access to the aircraft?

Are rampers and fuels people getting the body scans before being allowed access to aircraft?

[Edited 2010-10-17 09:59:58]


Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently onlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 23, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 29745 times:

Quoting CoachClass (Reply 16):
The underwear bomber had the explosives in his briefs, so to detect this wouldn't the screener have to "grope" the genitals to determine what's in the shorts????

Negative, checking the legs would detect bulges from protruding from the groin areas.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10930 posts, RR: 37
Reply 24, posted (4 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 29653 times:

Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 11):

My goal is to raise awareness amongst the flying public that they can refuse to undergo the nude-o-scope

Absolutely. It is my own right to refuse to go through their "showing your inside" machine. I have been patted heaps of times and I will keep going through that instead. There is no way they can force people to their full body scanners.



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
25 Post contains images PGNCS : Correct. I don't mind the body scan; it's better than the pat down. If I strenuously objected to the scan, I would expect the pat down. He can and di
26 nwa757boy : Neither are most caterers, agents and other ground personal. I applaud this pilot. Sometimes enough is enough from these monkeys in the TSA with the
27 usflyer msp : I support the pilot for refusing the body scanner but he lost me after refusing the pat down. He deserves whatever he gets after that.
28 WildcatYXU : Yes, however there is still the other pilot who most likely would have a different opinion on the subject. Remember the FEDEX case? A small explosion
29 ZANL188 : It seems clear to me then that ALL airline personnel (mx, caterers, crew, etc) need full on prehire/periodic background checks along with positive ID
30 RussianJet : Having read the full account, it is clear that this guy is out for trouble and brought the entire situation upon himself. Frisking has always been a p
31 ZANL188 : Such a person wouldn't NEED an explosive to accomplish this objective
32 Coronado990 : I am so sick of hearing this. If it is so dangerous where no one is trusted or can only be used by the privlidged, then it shouldn't exist. Simple as
33 RussianJet : What a silly extrapolation. It is absolutely right that if you think you are above the rules then you shouldn't be flying.
34 silentbob : I think you hit directly on the point that angered the pilot. If it's such a big deal with security, why aren't they conducting secondary screening e
35 EDICHC : The fact that they use radiation to generate the image. The technology is still relatively new and that the longer term effects on human tissue canno
36 ltbewr : Because of some damm idiot who had a bomb in his crotch last Christmas, we all have to pay with serious intrusions of our private parts and frequent a
37 WildcatYXU : Sure. The secondary screening decreases the odds of such person actually having the explosives.
38 billreid : Sorry, TSA just changed the Pat Down rules effective Oct 1. Now the pat down INCLUDES genital areas. That being said, Homeland Security goes outside
39 ZANL188 : A pilot in the cockpit doesn't need a weapon or explosives to bring down the aircraft. If we trust them to be in the cockpit there is simply no secur
40 srbmod : They already undergo a 10 year background check, and if they do not pass it, they don't get hired. Even those who do not work for an airline or for a
41 NIKV69 : Great and when a terrorist with a real bomb in his arse detonates and brings down a commerical airliner so will those people. Get a grip and give the
42 Santi319 : This is absolutely ridiculous don't you think if that pilot was a terrorist, he wouldn't really need a bomb to explode the plane, I mean he IS the pi
43 RussianJet : You know, a crew is made up of many people. Any one of those can and do occasionally do something totally crazy. Think of recent incidents involving
44 cschleic : There's some truth to this. But some people have to fly for their jobs, etc. Not everything in life is a choice. But....if the TSA is going to do its
45 ozark1 : After just reading SKY GODS, about the downfall of Pan Am, I'll just say---pilots are pilots
46 ikramerica : The October 1 change will not last too long. As soon as a Congressperson or Senator is required to have their genitals touched because they refused to
47 Wilco777 : Rules are for everyone in my opinion and the example should come from above. How can you tell a passenger to go through screening while next to him th
48 Remcor : I agree with everything else you said in your post, however the "_____ is a privilege and not a right" meme I think is over used. I've heard the same
49 flflyguy : I'm all for crew members having to go through security, although it does seem at times that the TSA focuses on crew as though we are a particular thre
50 RussianJet : That is ridiculous. In the UK it is not so, at least as far as I have seen. Security staff are subject to checks too.
51 MLD9S : I agree with you 100%. You could have x-rayed, body-scanned, pat-down and searched the luggage of the first officer of EgyptAir flight 990....He sure
52 RussianJet : Correct. But, that is one scenario, and there are a million others surrounding how one rogue crew member might sabotage a flight. One case proves not
53 Post contains images BMI727 : Why do you care what other passengers choose to do? Especially when you are trying to get them to choose the more lengthy (that is, the line moves sl
54 MPDPilot : FYI Flying is considered a right by federal law. It wasn't until the 70's that they required a search, which the federal government does not deem as
55 exFATboy : There's an escalation on the part of the TSA regarding the scanners - when they were first introduced, they were presented as an alternative to the p
56 ZANL188 : There is very little that be can done to prevent a determined flight deck crew member from bringing down an aircraft. Screening them with the pax doe
57 Post contains images kgaiflyer : I went through a full-body scanner at ELP several weeks ago and got patted-down anyway--because I had undeclared Q-tips in my shirt pocket. However,
58 YULWinterSkies : Some people are jerks from what i can read, and yes, that can sometimes include airline pilots. I do agree that security checks are annoying and may h
59 757luver : Gonna play devil's advocate here and say that maybe their logic is that if you refuse the full body scan then you might be trying to hide something w
60 ZANL188 : Use biometrics for ID. Allow pilots to enter the secured area somewhere other than the pax entry point - just like the rampers (who don't seem to nee
61 RussianJet : So, simply playing devil's advocate, are you saying it would be just as hard to stop an unarmed person crashing the flight than it would be to stop a
62 spacecadet : Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither. And, I would add to that famous quote, they will get neither. That said, I would take a p
63 ZANL188 : I'm saying flight deck crew do not need to bring a weapon or explosives to the flight deck to do harm. Further, I'm saying that there is no such thin
64 RussianJet : Not necessarily, no - but they could do harm more easily, or in a more concerted way, by bringing weapons or prohibited substances airside. Air crew
65 usafdo : I think this pilot is in big trouble!!! His company is probably going to say that he is responsible for making this whole thing happen. They will prob
66 474218 : However, in the case in question the person refusing to be searched was a passenger, not a crew member. His words "for my commute to work".
67 RussianJet : True, good point.
68 spacecadet : He knows it. He knew it at the time. He was expecting it. I'm sure he did. He said he knew the day was coming, and this is the decision he made. Whet
69 RussianJet : I would venture that he went looking for it.
70 ZANL188 : Flight deck crew most certainly are different from the average pax - they have a history with their employer, they have been deemed trustworthy with
71 brilondon : I hope he looses his job and is flagged so he could not get another airline job. What a crock. I have the right to travel safely, How is this idiot,
72 dispatchguy : Then he needs to be designated as a Federal Flight Deck Officer, and bypass security entirely, but, I think with this stunt, that option will no longe
73 raaadek : The way I see it is that everyone should be checked, argument that the pilot doesn't need a bomb to crash the plane is a good point, however if the pi
74 474218 : That is when they are doing the job. When a pilot is walking through the terminal they are no different then any other human being. You don't have to
75 ikramerica : He could also facilitate a highjacking or other air crime that doesn't lead to his death, and escape. Or could plant a timed explosive that would go
76 MLD9S : Okay....on THAT point....then why dont caterers need to go through screening? The mechanics? They are on an off an airplane and can plant anything th
77 MPDPilot : The issue with your analogy is a bus is operated by a private company usually, telephone service is usually provided by a private company, Security a
78 FlyASAGuy2005 : So, people's history don't change after said checks? Because he was clean when he was hired does not mean he is clean today or tomorrow. Very short s
79 Post contains images stasisLAX : Those that are willing to give away their precious personal liberties in return for TEMPORARY safety deserve neither liberty nor safety, to paraphase
80 Post contains images fxramper : Like this ass? At least Dale makes $170k/yr vs. the guy that commutes from Texarkana for $25/hr. Way to make a statement and make your statement bro.
81 billreid : Incorrect are you serious? ABSOLUTELY CORRECT! I think you forget It is the job of DHS to protect the flying public and that lays in their hands, if
82 iairallie : The opt out pat down is not the same as the traditional pat down. It is much more intrusive and in my experience designed to be punative.
83 Flighty : It sounds like he mis-understood that body scanners will be used just like secondary screening. As a pilot he knows that there is no negotiation about
84 NIKV69 : Pat down will miss expolsives in the underwear. Has a nice ring to it but makes no sense here. We have people trying to bring down planes with bombs
85 Surprise : I have always been pretty conservative but when I read this my first thought was our civil rights and how much they have been eroded. I actually thoug
86 ULMFlyer : Kudos to you, sir. What pisses me off is how the TSA not only does not advertise that anyone has the option to opt out, but also how their agents try
87 RussianJet : I didn't mean passengers - I mean me and other airport professionals who work in law enforcement and lots of other areas, who also have a lengthy pro
88 cpd : So, would you say then that the punitive pat down is designed only to embarrass and bully people into going through the body scanners, rather than pr
89 Boeing747_600 : Hopefully not for long. The only way to describe an individual like this is "mindlessly disruptive". Lets look at the facts here A) He refuses to tak
90 580fa : As a 20+ year industry person: This pilot chose his path, and will get what he has coming. Whether you agree with his motives or his tactics, he knew
91 iairallie : There is a balance I'll give up so much of my liberty in exchange for so much extra security. This new machine and associated procedures ask too much
92 ThirtyEcho : This will go on until full body scans of famous people begin showing up on the internet. That will be inevitable.
93 Boeing747_600 : I seriously doubt that the images are stored in a repository, so this may be a phantom concern.
94 580fa : Don't be so sure about that. Mind you, I think the dire aviation security situation is WAY past what could be called "questionable scans". Having sai
95 Post contains links Boeing747_600 : Give me a good reason to be sure about the fact that leaked images from AIT scans invariably will find their way onto the internet. I agree that it's
96 planesmith : If my reading of his text is correct, then I fully support this man: "At this point he and another agent explained the TSA’s latest decree, saying
97 dldtw1962 : I understand what he is saying. But, in return. He would be the first one to scream if someone was let through the screening and had a bomb or gun on
98 HBGDS : Perhaps I'm missing something, but if you read his full account, it was not the secondary screening pat down that he was against, it was the demand t
99 aerlingusa330 : Pilots should have to be screened just to avoid the occasional nut who tries to pass something by TSA. It's ironic because pilots don't need to bring
100 spacecadet : I'm not carrying any explosives, so I don't care. Your mistake here in replying to me is in assuming I'm living in as much fear as you are. I'm not.
101 Boeing747_600 : A AIT scanner would have caught that Nigerian underwear-explosives jackass and that's a good enough start for me. erosion of what freedoms?! The 4th
102 JayDub : The willingness of so many Americans to hand over their civil liberties is saddening to me. More people need to refuse these invasive and humiliating
103 Post contains images IBOAviator : I have personally never been subject to such screening. I can say that 9 times out of 10 when travelling within the States, I have been subject to add
104 HKA098 : I have to go with the pilot on this one, just because I find the TSA obnoxious. I also have to agree that he should have taken the pat-down, the only
105 BMI727 : Wearing my seatbelt doesn't guarantee that I won't die in an accident but I still do it.
106 Slider : His problem is that he refused any secondary means of screening. Hey, I admire the stand and do share many of the same civil rights and privacy concer
107 ikramerica : It helps prevent death or injury in turbulence. And it's hardly an equivalent idea. Wearing a seatbelt is not an invasion of privacy. It might imping
108 IBOAviator : Although I never gave it much thought, there is always ample warning before you walk into ANY airport screening area that if you object to "physical s
109 robsaw : I really hope this goes to the Supreme Court of the USA where we will find out once for all whether the USA is the "Land of the Free" or has firmly be
110 Daleaholic : I don't understand the attitude of some people on here... It's SECURITY... To ensure that all staff (ground crew, cabin crew, flight deck, cleaners, c
111 RussianJet : 'fascist, police-state' because some guy who point blank refuses to be searched before proceeding through to a restricted area in an airport is not a
112 Post contains links silentbob : That's no different from having a cop ask if they can search your car without a warrant, then detaining you until a warrant arrives because your refu
113 Boeing747_600 : If this is the one involving an Indian Bollywood actor, then that was dismissed as a hoax.
114 SA7700 : A fair amount of posts have been deleted from this thread, due to various forum rule violations by a select few members. Please note that any further
115 Woof : Yep, and that was the primary contributor to my having skin cancer. Just been discharged after 2 ops and 3 years of checkups. If I had the choice, I
116 iairallie : 1. Wearing a seatbelt isn't a significant invasion of your privacy 2. Seatbelts wearing provides a HUGE unrefutable safety benefit There is that trad
117 RussianJet : How do you know?
118 iairallie : Research for my class on airline security and recent publications regarding the efficacy of this technology in deterring attacks like that of the und
119 billreid : I apolagize greatly. The new body search goes in effect on 31 Oct. It has been in test mode at LAS and BWI.
120 iairallie : GPT they got really handsy when I opted out and that was AUG. It makes me never want to fly again I really think I've hit the end of my rope on this
121 MiAAmi : You know, a crew is made up of many people. Any one of those can and do occasionally do something totally crazy. Think of recent incidents involving d
122 iairallie : Cell phones have cameras these days and direct data links to the internet. Unless they are going to start virtual strip searching and patting down th
123 30west : I think most people are missing one of his big points. That he has gone thru that checkpoint for 5 years and this was the first time they changed wha
124 usafdo : TSA is a total mess! This orginization operates differently at every airport (as mentioned by 30West). This puts the flying public in jeopardy because
125 Post contains links YVRLTN : There are two sides to this coin. I can see what ZANL188 is saying, if a pilot really wanted to do some damage, he/she could quite easily bring down t
126 NorthstarBoy : While my first reaction upon reading his post in the link provided was "JUst go through the damned scanner, Michael" I also understand his underlying
127 Wilco777 : Sometimes i think some people have wayyyyyyyy too much time on their hands to be writing certain comments on this thread. It makes me laugh when i rea
128 EDICHC : Not if you are an international transit pax.
129 474218 : If you an international transit passenger you didn't WALK into the airport!
130 hka098 : The choice about whether or not to use Facebook is much more casual than the choice to fly. I know many folks who are concerned by the privacy issues
131 474218 : Humans have a few "needs" air, water, food, shelter being the basics. I really don't think you can list flying as a "need!
132 Slider : I don't disagree, but as I noted in my first response, undergoing a security screening is a requirement of his occupation. He declined even the secon
133 RussianJet : At what point in the process do you feel you are being 'treated like a criminal'? I can honestly say I've never felt any such thing when going throug
134 robsaw : Your obfuscating the real, constitutionally recognized "need" for "Liberty".
135 474218 : "Liberty" in not a need in the Constitution its a "right".[Edited 2010-10-20 12:35:47]
136 hka098 : True, but what if that need stems from your line of work? A paycheck provides the food, water, and the shelter. One could always get another line of
137 iairallie : Which means the government cannot act to restrict or deprive you of it unless under a strict scruitny test there is a compelling state interest and t
138 aviateur : ENEMIES DOMESTIC So, everybody is asking what I think about Michael Roberts, the airline pilot who refused a TSA body scan and was denied entry into t
139 YVRLTN : Am I right in thinking that most (all??) aircraft have an axe in the cockpit as part of the emergency equipment??
140 silentbob : Funny how you you can use crew pass in BWI but need a cavity search in other cities.
141 cpd : Ridiculous, just ridiculous. I actually hope that they do get full law enforcement powers, and maybe even provided with weapons too. All it will take
142 Post contains links PHLJJS : CrewPASS was approved for full implemtation by TSA in 2009 after the successful testing at BWI, PIT and CAE. Congress however refused to let the gove
143 RussianJet : Yes, but most of that is just an irritating level of impoliteness or lack of courtesy - still pretty far from what I would call being treated like a
144 PresRDC : The problem with these scanners is that they are an overreaction to a statistically insignificant threat. When you balance the definate invasion of pr
145 JohnJ : Memphis is really two airports in one. There's the passenger terminal, where this incident took place, and the massive FedEx SuperHub on the other sid
146 United_fan : The ironic part is,the pilots are on toal control of the plane,and they have the crash ax!!
147 EDICHC : But I was subjected to full security screening the last time I transited at DFW.
148 tugger : As Fedex is a private business and not a "public" airport, Fedex provides its own security in accordance with the rules that the TSA has established.
149 Post contains images LAXorLGWonDL : I was "subjected" to the body scanners in Atlanta's E Terminal two weeks ago after an LHR-ATL flight. Having flown a few times in my life, and more re
150 Post contains images Part147 : You know, I've read these threads about the scanners for a looong long time now and have finally decided to bite the bullet and share my feelings abou
151 Tigerguy : Now, I grant that the TSA's procedures leave a bit to be desired. Consistency in their application and an emphasis on treating the pax as pax and not
152 Jonathan L : I went through one of these machines for the first time today in TPA. The experience will certainly be on my mind before I book any future airline tic
153 tugger : There is an element of "absolute power corrupts absolutely" in this situation. Until the people step in, whether via legislative power or public outc
154 AAairplane : I personally do not see a huge "invasion of privacy issue" with these scanners. As stated before, the people who look at these pictures are in a faraw
155 PresRDC : The TSA wants you to think this way. If you think about it, though, the risk is so small as to not worth worrying about. If you were in a plane on th
156 Maverick623 : Irrelevant. The issue is not that someone is or isn't winking at me, or knows who I am while they're looking at me. In fact, if I were to support the
157 silentbob : Today they're in the back room, tomorrow they're running the bag scanner and the day after that they're checking ID. They rotate through the various
158 TVNWZ : It's called terriorism. This is what the terrorists have in mind. disrupt the enemy. And we are disrupted. My solution is give everyone on the plane
159 Post contains images tugger : Correction: "aren't worth it." But then they couldn't serve alcohol on board! And sadly TSA does not currently allow baseball bats on board. Though i
160 BWI5OH : What we have here is a crusader. After reading this article, it wasn't so much about him not wanting to go through the "x-ray" device or being frisked
161 AAairplane : Ahhhh....didn't know that. Good point.
162 iairallie : Maybe but we need crusaders if we are going to stop this incroachment on our civil liberties. It's time to draw the line the trade off is not worth t
163 cpd : That's a bit unusual. Everything was still there after the check, and nothing had been planted in it, right? I know it should be expected, but with T
164 Maverick623 : LHR. IIRC, it took 24 hours for a picture to leak out. Any state will arrest a person for "failure to ID", but simply not having a form of picture ID
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Schiphol To Use Full Body Scanner On Flights To US posted Wed Dec 30 2009 11:30:01 by Evan767
Body Scan Only Way To Stop Suicide Bomber posted Wed Dec 30 2009 09:22:35 by Eugdog
Schiphol To Use Full Body Scanner On Flights To US posted Wed Dec 30 2009 08:48:29 by DariusBieber
Virgin And Easyjet Teaming Up To Bid For LGW posted Fri Nov 14 2008 02:06:51 by Warren84
Skywest 4Q And 2007 Full Year Profit Up posted Fri Feb 8 2008 09:27:06 by LAXintl
Bmi And UA Looking To Team Up To Battle Open Skies posted Wed Apr 4 2007 01:24:14 by UnitedTristar
Do UK Domestics Get Up To Full Altitude? posted Wed Aug 23 2006 13:54:04 by Ba757gla
DL Pilot Deal To Allow Up To 200 76-seat Aircraft posted Wed Apr 26 2006 05:44:29 by Planemaker
BA And BD Team Up To KSA! posted Mon Apr 17 2006 11:28:46 by AIR MALTA
Air Canada Signs For 45 E190's And Up To 90 CRJ's posted Fri Oct 1 2004 18:22:21 by Iowaman
Mass Protest To TSA Body Scanner On Wed 11/24? posted Sun Nov 14 2010 23:30:39 by airportguy1971
Schiphol To Use Full Body Scanner On Flights To US posted Wed Dec 30 2009 11:30:01 by Evan767
Body Scan Only Way To Stop Suicide Bomber posted Wed Dec 30 2009 09:22:35 by Eugdog
Schiphol To Use Full Body Scanner On Flights To US posted Wed Dec 30 2009 08:48:29 by DariusBieber
Virgin And Easyjet Teaming Up To Bid For LGW posted Fri Nov 14 2008 02:06:51 by Warren84
Skywest 4Q And 2007 Full Year Profit Up posted Fri Feb 8 2008 09:27:06 by LAXintl
Bmi And UA Looking To Team Up To Battle Open Skies posted Wed Apr 4 2007 01:24:14 by UnitedTristar
Do UK Domestics Get Up To Full Altitude? posted Wed Aug 23 2006 13:54:04 by Ba757gla
Whats Up With DL And QF Flights To HNL posted Sun Jan 9 2011 09:00:34 by DTWAGENT
Mass Protest To TSA Body Scanner On Wed 11/24? posted Sun Nov 14 2010 23:30:39 by airportguy1971
Schiphol To Use Full Body Scanner On Flights To US posted Wed Dec 30 2009 11:30:01 by Evan767
Body Scan Only Way To Stop Suicide Bomber posted Wed Dec 30 2009 09:22:35 by Eugdog
Schiphol To Use Full Body Scanner On Flights To US posted Wed Dec 30 2009 08:48:29 by DariusBieber
Virgin And Easyjet Teaming Up To Bid For LGW posted Fri Nov 14 2008 02:06:51 by Warren84
Skywest 4Q And 2007 Full Year Profit Up posted Fri Feb 8 2008 09:27:06 by LAXintl
Bmi And UA Looking To Team Up To Battle Open Skies posted Wed Apr 4 2007 01:24:14 by UnitedTristar
Do UK Domestics Get Up To Full Altitude? posted Wed Aug 23 2006 13:54:04 by Ba757gla