What happens when you refuse to pose for TSA or be sexually molested to fly.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I never said that no doctor would molest a patient. I said that the TSA checkpoints are not analogous to a doctor's office.

If you don't think that a TSA agent has influence over a person, then please read some of the studies on authority, I recommend two of the staples, Milgram and Zimbardo. Everything about TSA is designed to send the message "I am in charge."

It is not difficult to opt out of medical care. You tell the doctor, "I don't want treatment" or something to that effect and ask to be discharged. The staff will inform you that you will have to sign a release stating that you left Against Medical Advice (AMA), once you do you are free to go. The only time this is not the case is if a patient is on a legal hold for psychiatric evaluation. Doctors cannot involuntarily commit a person just because they are refusing treatment, unless the person will die if they leave. As soon as the person can walk out the door without being in imminent danger, they are allowed to do so with an AMA. If a person is on a psychiatric hold for suicide, they can be held for only 72 hours before the hospital must show a compelling reason to keep them. If at any time the person stops being suicidal and stabilizes they must be released if requested.

I worked at a hospital on a lock-down psych unit and had many patients who were suicidal or psychotic who wanted to leave. It take a lot of paperwork and extensive and specific documentation to hold someone against their will.
 
wooflepoof said:
You're right I hadn't done, but we're getting a bit off topic. my point still stands that just because something fits a weird black and white interpretation of someones defenition of molestation or assault, there are other variables involved before you get to accuse someone (let alone an entire government agency) of being a child molester or a rapist.
Click to expand...

My point, as stated earlier, is that the intent of the checkpoint and the policy does not matter to the survivor. What they perceive has happening is their reality and in that reality they are being revictimized. This is not a small population, think of four women you know; chances are pretty good that one of them is the survivor or a sexual assault, rape or molestation.

TSA removes the person's ability to escape and to refuse the touch. They are put in the situation of having to comply to escape since they are unable to fight or leave without the screening (at least to leave freely without a major fine that could easily financially wipe out many Americans). They are put in the position of being coerced into a behavior and submitting in order to escape. This act of submission and the removal of the person's free agency and choice is incredibly damaging.

I don't know how I can state this any more strongly. It is the removal of options, the removal of choice and the lack of personal agency and power to control what happens to one's own body that is the most damaging element here. The physical touch anchors the emotional experience of fear and helplessness and can cause flashbacks to the time of the abuse, essentially regressing the person to an earlier stage of development. This act can undo years of therapy and recovery, it can cause severe dysfunction in one's life, including the reemergence of previously conquered sexual dysfunction and intimacy difficulties in spousal relationships.

This is not hyperbole, this is not exaggeration. If you doubt me, please feel free to spend the next few years reading up on all the postmodern schools of therapy, as well as trauma theory.
 
wooflepoof said:
[citation needed]
Click to expand...

How am I supposed to provide a citation for a sentence fragment that leads into an explanation of authority including citations?

Do you just pick stuff at random and ask for citations?
 
I'm struggling to remember when I said i thought the TSA didn't have influence over a person.
 
Last edited:
I did not say that you said that TSA had no influence; I inferred that, since we were discussing these two situations and mentioned authority in one, discussing the nature of authority in the other was acceptable. You compared the TSA screening to a doctor's office and then brought up the issue of authority within a doctor's office. I simply balanced this with an examination of authority at the TSA checkpoint. Please note that I predicated my post with an "If," not saying that you thought in such a way, but addressing the authority issue based on an inference I made from your previous posts.

I hope that clarifies my intentions in that post.
 
wooflepoof said:
If people are willing to temporarily curtail their rights so they can board an aircraft and maybe feel a little bit safer doing so, then who are you to say they can't? I don't thing airport check-in is a big enough issue for most people to go up in arms and cry about their rights being violated.
Click to expand...


The point is they shouldn't have to curtail their rights. September Elevnth happened because box openers were planted on planes by airport employees and not brought on by the "terrorists". Those same people are still not required to go through security checks before they are allowed to get near the airplanes and pilots are/were(not sure where that stands). So why are the people being subjected to this type of search(both scanner and patdowns) when it was never the problem anyway?
 
So why are the people being subjected to this type of search(both scanner and patdowns) when it was never the problem anyway?
Click to expand...
It really makes you question... I know stupidity overrides malice, but... really? Can that many people be so collectively dim or are we being conditioned for something much bigger?
 
epp_b said:
It really makes you question... I know stupidity overrides malice, but... really? Can that many people be so collectively dim or are we being conditioned for something much bigger?
Click to expand...

tinfoil-hat.jpg
 
Yeah, yeah, laugh it up... ten years ago, you'd have had the same response if I told you that the future would have us subjected to virtual nude photo machines and pat-downs so aggressive that those performing them would be arrested for sexual assault if not for the TSA badge.
 
Last edited:
epp_b said:
Yeah, yeah, laugh it up... ten years ago, you'd have had the same response if I told you that the future would have us subjected to virtual nude photo machines and pat-downs so aggressive that those performing them would be arrested for sexual assault if not for the TSA badge.
Click to expand...

If you remembered to mention airport check-in I would have thought it a logical evolution from x-raying luggage to people, even with the spin you put on it (virtual nude photo machine? really? And a microwave oven is an oscillating electromagnetic wave food irradiator-nuker.); just a light frisking is grounds for a sexual assault charge without proper authority.
 
Last edited:
If you remembered to mention airport check-in I would have thought it a logical evolution from x-raying luggage to people
Click to expand...
So, what's the next "logical evolution"? Full x-rays and CT scans to ensure people haven't ingested explosives?

"hurrr we'll all get cancer but we need it for secerrrity durrr"

just a light frisking is grounds for a sexual assault charge without proper authority.
Click to expand...
No, it's grounds for a sexual assault charge without reasonable suspicion or a warrant.
 
Last edited:
epp_b said:
So, what's the next "logical evolution"? Full x-rays and CT scans to ensure people haven't ingested explosives?

"hurrr we'll all get cancer but we need it for secerrrity durrr"
Click to expand...

Still on the radiation idiocy eh? I guess its natural to be scared of things you don't understand.
user_luddite.gif


No, it's grounds for a sexual assault charge without the reasonable suspicion or a warrant.
Click to expand...

Has a pat-down search at the airport been determined to constitute unreasonable suspicion?

P.S. Try wording it without the fearmonger spin attached next time.
 
Wooflepoof, the body-searches have not been tested in court yet, but there are several pending lawsuits that seek to determine an answer to this question.

I believe that they are unconstitutional and that the means used to search passengers is unreasonable.
 
Blind_Io said:
Wooflepoof, the body-searches have not been tested in court yet, but there are several pending lawsuits that seek to determine an answer to this question.

I believe that they are unconstitutional and that the means used to search passengers is unreasonable.
Click to expand...
O.K.

Epp_b was telling me 10 years ago about "pat-downs so aggressive that those performing them would be arrested for sexual assault if not for the TSA badge." and I was saying that without the proper badge, just about any form of touching can be considered sexual assault. Just trying to comment on the absurdity of his deliberately sensationalist wording and how it wouldn't work on modern me or 10-year-ago me
 
Last edited:
You are entirely correct. It would be sexual assault or assault and battery, depending on the type of touch involved.
 
The crux of this whole discussion is the notion of reasonability, which, like assholes, everyone has an opinion of it. This is why that until the people that have been selected to legally determine whats reasonable or not do so, these bold assertions don't really hold any water with me nor should they with anyone else really, so checking the
Gman333-X-ferrari said:
HIDE YO KIDS, HIDE YO WIVES, 'CAUSE THE TSA BE RAPIN' EVERYBODY OUT THERE!
Click to expand...
language at the door is the only way you'll get any reasonable (pun kind of intended) response from me that doesn't warrant an extraocular straining eye-roll
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top