Texas Legislation Proposes Felony Charges for TSA Agents

[Lighthawk]

Rep. David Simpson (R-Longview) introduced a package of bills into the Texas House of Representatives on Tuesday that would challenge the TSA’s authority in a number of ways. The first bill, HB 1938, prohibits full body scanning equipment in any Texas airport and provides for criminal and civil penalties on any airport operator who installs the equipment. The second bill, HB 1937, criminalizes touching without consent and searches without probable cause.

HB 1938 reads in part:

(b) An airport operator may not allow body imaging scanning equipment to be installed or operated in any airport in this state.

(c) An airport operator commits an offense if the operator fails to comply with Subsection (b).

(d) An airport operator who commits an offense under Subsection (c) is subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $1,000 for each day of the violation.

HB 1937 includes the following:

(3) as part of a search performed to grant access to a publicly accessible building or form of transportation, intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:

(A) searches another person without probable cause to believe the person committed an offense; and

(B) touches the anus, sexual organ, or breasts of the other person, including touching through clothing, or touches the other person in a manner that would be offensive to a reasonable person.

(f) …. An offense under Subsection (a)(3) is a state jail felony.

Both bills empower the Texas Attorney General to bring suit in court.

The TSA will likely challenge such a law, but the Texas legislature stands on solid ground. Local governments control airports and no enumerated power in the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to regulate them. Under the Tenth Amendment, airport operation falls under state jurisdiction.

TSA regulations allow for passengers to refuse the body scans, but they must instead submit to an intrusive full-body pat down. This package addresses both issues. The HB 1938 legislation addresses the physical installation of full-body scans, and HB 1937 addresses the problematic constitutional issues of TSA security screening procedures. Random full-body scans and pat downs in the absence of probable cause arguably violates the Fourth Amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…

Source

[Captain Seafort]

About bloody time someone did something about that lot. While the scanners are entirely reasonable, their idea of what constitutes a reasonable search isn't.

[RK_Striker_JK_5]

About bloody time someone did something about that lot. While the scanners are entirely reasonable, their idea of what constitutes a reasonable search isn't.

Agree entirely. Way too invasive.

[Coalition]

A simple counter would be to say that by entering the airport counts as consent to the search. Make sure it is posted clearly, especially in the line approaching the security stations. Still, the scary thought is one person entering the airport, getting to the middle of the lines approaching security, and detonte a bomb there. He never goes through the scanner, so he never gets spotted.

The other option would be to write the candidates running for office,and ask them to put forward legislation to have the scanners removed from the airports. Get enough people doing this, across the states, and TSA goes bye.

[Mikey]

The problem isn't the existence of the TSA, it's the manner in which it conducts its business. Having had a first-hand (completely unwarranted) run-in, I can tell you that the mindset I encountered among TSA officers was somewhere between Gestapo and Orwellian Thought Police.

[Tsukiyumi]

Wow, and we're the first ones to object in a meaningful fashion?

I'll admit, I didn't see that coming.

[Deepcrush]

When the Texans think its gone to far, its a good hint...

[Tyyr]

I've wondered about this in relation to the 4th Amendment. A cop can't search me unless I either give him permission or he has good cause to think I've committed a crime.

A TSA agent can either do a virtual strip search or grope every inch of me just because I want to get on a plane.

What?

Besides, if you fly you know what a joke airport "security" really is. Like Coalition said, it would be a fairly simple thing to take a bomb in a suitcase and detonate it in the security line. When I flew out of Atlanta a year ago the line to get into the screening area had to be half an acre of cattle chutes. Set off a pipe bomb in there and you'd have dozens if not hundreds dead with far less hassle than blowing up an airplane. And can you imagine the royal fucking mess you make of the entire aviation industry if they have to secure the ENTIRE airport?

The last time I flew with the family we had a baby stroller for our little boy. We kept him in it all the way to the plane. At no point was the thing ever swabbed for bomb residue and it was metal tubing so the x-ray machine did fuck all. We walked down the jetway with it, left it at the door and the baggage guys tossed it in the luggage compartment and called it a day. Probably a good thing I hadn't packed the tubing full of five pounds of Semtex.

Then you've got the show bomber and the underwear bombers who only failed to blow up their aircraft on account of being morons. They were perfectly able to get the explosives on the planes.

And those full body scanners and the pat down can be defeated with a C4 suppository. Sure it would kind of suck but if you're willing to die for Allah you can buy a tube of lube and get your buddy to help if it means killing a few hundred infidels.

[Mikey]

I had the exact same (non-)experience with a baby stroller - however, in the same gate exam, the occupant of the stroller had her cup confiscated as apple juice "could be a component of a binary explosive."

[Tyyr]

Right... and I travel a good bit for my job so I'm exposed to it on a regular basis. Like how you can't have any liquid container larger than 3oz. That's all well and good but 6oz. of binary explosive is more than enough to take down an airplane. And since they don't really put much of a limit on how many 3oz bottles of liquid you can bring that could easily be 12 or 18oz of binary explosive.

It's just a giant waste of time and money is all it is. Our fixation on finding the magic gizmo that'll make us safe is a dead end because it never will.

[Lighthawk]

Remember, it's not a matter of actually making airports safe. It's a matter of presenting the illusion of safety to the general public so they'll shut the hell up and buy plane tickets.