Eugene Volokh thought the title to this post at Skating on Stilts was funny enough to warrant a post about the title alone:
“Actually, a Chip That Big Will Have to Come Off Your Shoulder and Go Through the X-Ray.”OK, I’m not sure I’m entirely persuaded by Stewart Baker’s post — it’s not clear, for instance, why handcuffing was proper under the circumstances — but the title is very funny.
But “not entirely persuaded” falls short of not at all persuaded, funny title or not. The post referred to is about more than handcuffs:
A well-known war blogger, Michael Yon, is complaining that he was detained and handcuffed when he refused to answer TSA’s questions. Yon took the position that he could decide what questions it was proper for TSA to ask, and if he didn’t think the questions were proper, he refused to answer. Said Yon, “If I am the guy on that passport and I don’t have any contraband in my luggage, it is a matter for the FBI, not the TSA.”
Stewart Baker has a definitive view of Michael Yon’s shoulder chip:
This is precisely the kind of attitude that will have to change if we’re ever going to have real air security. If we want TSA to look for terrorists, not just weapons, and after Christmas, it’s obvious that we do, then we’ll have to expect TSA to ask questions, including questions whose relevance isn’t immediately obvious to the traveler.
The media, following heightened security following the underpants bomber, has made a point of noting that passengers have been almost universally compliant with the new security measures. The reports are meant to suggest that we’re all on board with them, we understand that the TSA is just protecting us and we’re happy to comply.
That’s not necessarily the message at all. Rather, the message I take is that resistance is futile and will only lead to longer delays, more heated tempers and maybe even an introduction to handcuffs. Things are bad enough, and on line in an airport isn’t the time to make them worse.
Except that shoulder-chip carrier Yon, according to Baker, wants to undermine our entire security apparatus based upon his personal, subjective view of what the TSA should be allowed to ask. So we should all get blown out of the sky because Michael Yon says so?
Notably omitted from both Baker’s “silence of the lambs”post and Eugene’s “it would be funnier without handcuffs” post is a bit of information on what was asked of Michael Yon to put that big ol’ chip on his shoulder.
That’s not necessarily the message at all. Rather, the message I take is that resistance is futile and will only lead to longer delays, more heated tempers and maybe even an introduction to handcuffs. Things are bad enough, and on line in an airport isn’t the time to make them worse.
Except that shoulder-chip carrier Yon, according to Baker, wants to undermine our entire security apparatus based upon his personal, subjective view of what the TSA should be allowed to ask. So we should all get blown out of the sky because Michael Yon says so?
Notably omitted from both Baker’s “silence of the lambs”post and Eugene’s “it would be funnier without handcuffs” post is a bit of information on what was asked of Michael Yon to put that big ol’ chip on his shoulder.
At this point the TSA officials escorted Yon to a designated screening area where they examined the contents of his bag. “Then they asked me how much money I make,” Yon said. Yon suggested to the TSA officials that the question was inappropriate and unrelated to transportation security. The award-winning blogger noted another TSA officer approached Yon: “he asked who do I work for.” ”I did not answer the question which clearly was upsetting to the TSA officers.”Like Baker, I agree that we mere mortals may not know the rationale for our TSA protectors asking for certain information. It may be that travelers with lower income are more likely to blow up airplanes. Or maybe those with higher incomes are more likely. The TSA has not made me privy to their secrets. But regardless, to demand that person boarding an airplane disclose his income seems off-the-wall nuts and unacceptably intrusive.
Yon was escorted to a room elsewhere in the airport where he said he remained silent during much of the questioning. According to Yon, “they handcuffed me for failing to cooperate. They said I was impeding their ability to do their job.”
One has to assume that Baker knew what the question asked of Yon was before coming up with his very funny headline about Yon’s chip on his shoulder. One therefore has to assume that Baker has no problem with the question. Given it’s intrusiveness, one has to assume that there is no question that Baker would find beyond the pale.
[Insert really offensive, really intrusive, question about strange sexual proclivities.]
Why not? Where is the rule book about how far the TSA can go? What questions are off-limits? At what point are we allowed to have a chip on our shoulder, just because some guy in a funky uniform who was a server at Dairy Queen the month before asks you an inappropriately personal question? While we might not like the rigors of the current security regime, most people have gone along with it just to get on the plane and go. Does this mean that the TSA got the message that it can do anything, anything at all, and we’ll just happily comply? Maybe so.
But what makes no sense to me is that the only problem Eugene had with this funny-titled post is the handcuffs? I can’t see Eugene answering the question. I can’t see me answering the question either.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
TSA: Is, uh,…Is your wife a goer, eh? Know whatahmean, know whatahmean, nudge nudge, know whatahmean, say no more?
Passenger: I, uh, I beg your pardon?
TSA: Your, uh, your wife, does she go, eh, does she go, eh?
Passenger: (flustered) Well, she sometimes “goes”, yes.
TSA: Aaaaaaaah bet she does, I bet she does, say no more, say no more, knowwhatahmean, nudge nudge?
Passenger: (confused) I’m afraid I don’t quite follow you.
TSA: Follow me. Follow me. That’s good, that’s good! A nod’s as good as a wink to a blind bat!
I didn’t expect the Spanish Inquisition!
You do that awfully well. I take it you have some experience with heavy breathing?
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.
I liked Yon’s response about the FBI’s job versus the TSA’s. Once a passenger’s baggage and person have been cleared for security, that should be the end of the TSA’s intrusion on the person. If the TSA really believed he was a threat, they could have subjected him to a more “thorough” investigation of his person and then cleared him. If they thought he was a threat to national security after he left the airport, they could have passed his info on to the FBI.
That said, any ideas on how Yon could turn his situation in a suit that would put at issue the scope of the TSA’s authority?
It’s already been done. Yon didn’t invent the point about the TSA’s limited jurisdiction, which extends only to airline security and not to crime prevention, but the problem is getting the former Dairy Queen server to honor the limits of his authority.
According to Yon’s facebook page, it was Customs not TSA who did the handcuffing and question asking. Not sure that it matters. It is neither of their business.