Opt-Out Cop-Out
National Opt-Out Day seems to have fizzled, judging by the percentage of holiday travelers who insisted on vigorous frisking instead of submitting to a full-body scan. According to the Transportation Security Administration, only 39 of the 47,000 passengers who went through security lines on Wednesday at Atlanta's Hartsfield International Airport, the country's busiest, opted to be felt up. The TSA says waiting times in Atlanta and elsewhere were no longer than normal for pre-Thanksgiving travel. New York Times media columnist David Carr notes that the chaos reporters eagerly anticipated, with protesters snarling lines by resisting the scans, failed to materialize. Implicitly conceding that there was not a whole lot of opting out, the organizers/instigators of the protest argue that they succeeded in drawing public attention to the issue, which was their goal all along.
It does not surprise me that few travelers opted for the less pleasant, more humiliating search option in order to make a statement. Those numbers do not necessarily mean that most Americans have no problem with the new procedures. As Bob Poole argues, public outrage may grow as the body scanner rollout continues and more people encounter the machines. Still, Americans have a history, at airports and elsewhere, of quickly getting used to invasions of privacy and infringements of liberty aimed at enhancing public safety. Requirements that originally seemed objectionable—from surrendering your pocket tools and beverages to taking off your shoes, from mandatory seat belt laws to DUI roadblocks, from divulging your Social Security number to showing your papers, from letting police dogs sniff your luggage or your car to signing a registry when you buy allergy medicine—soon become the new normal. And when it comes to deciding when a search or seizure is "unreasonable," practices that people readily learn to tolerate are more likely to be upheld by the courts. Writing in The Washington Post, George Washington University law professor Jeffrey Rosen argues that Fourth Amendment challenges to the new TSA procedures nevertheless have a good chance of succeeding.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
i have opted out of flying in the USA entirelly.
Ditto. I thought the "opt out" meant you were opting out of flying. NOT choosing a more invasive pat down. I would like to see the numbers on how many people chose not to fly last week.
C'mon Reason, do a little research before posting doing TSA public relations.
Not many people had to "opt-out" because the TSA made it so they didn't have to "opt-out". I flew out of Hartsfield and, in the 20 minutes I was in the screening area, no one was asked to go through the scanner (just the metal detector).
It appears that was the case in Newark as well...
And, judging by passenger accounts, the scanners were not being unused nationwide.
This blog post is disappointing as it acts as an echo for gov't propaganda.
Oops...
C'mon Reason, do a little research before posting doing TSA public relations.
And, judging by passenger accounts, the scanners were not being unused nationwide.
Yeah, I flew from Atlanta/Hartsfield to Monterey, CA round trip, with a layover in LA each way, a couple of weeks ago. Had to go thru security at all 3 airports (walked outside for a smoke in LA). I didnt see a single RapeScan, er, Rapiscan at any of the three.
Slashdot had this discussion the other day, and several posters noted that the TSA was not operating the scanners most of the day.
from surrendering your pocket tools and beverages to taking off your shoes, from mandatory seat belt laws to DUI roadbloacks, from divulging your Social Security number to showing your papers, from letting police dogs sniff your luggage or your car to signing a registry when you buy allergy medicine?soon become the new normal
What a sad summary of the decline and fall of our Constitutional Republic.
This is why I say what is broken isn't just politics, but our culture. And this won't reverse itself absent some horribly traumatic shock to the system (and likely not even then).
There will be no soft landing, no incremental roll-back of the Total State. It will have to collapse of its own leviathan weight, and hopefully people will learn from that collapse, and not set out to erect a new Total State as fast as they can.
There will be no soft landing, no incremental roll-back of the Total State. It will have to collapse of its own leviathan weight, and hopefully people will learn from that collapse, and not set out to erect a new Total State as fast as they can.
"But don't you see? The Total State we had was only 99% total. That was where we went wrong. We need to erect a new Total State that's 110% total!"
So you've been watching The Walking Dead too?
""This is why I say what is broken isn't just politics, but our culture. ""
Yeah, I've been pointing the finger at the citizenry for a while. Back in the 1970s people would be outraged with the idea that your whereabouts could be tracked, now we love getting the device at a discount with a two year contract. The joys of the smartphone outweights the idea that your movements can be tracked by GPS. Personal data is treated the same way, the benefits of socializing with Facebook outweight the idea that you are turning your information, activities, and list of friends to a third party.
While i kind of agree with the sentiment a little perspective here would be prudent. It was a mere 2% of the populous that were rabble rouses for the revoltuion and it was only fought by 20%. So mass lemingism is nothing new to this country...it is us neredoweels and nogoodniks that keep the flag buring and the fire flying, or something.
I am serious and stop calling me Shirly.
RIP
This article *seems* to say that few people object to the new security procedures:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....fb3721.jpg
However, if you look at the chart you will find that over the past 10 years, as these new procedures were gradually rolled out, that the number of passengers at Thanksgiving has declined from 6.1 million to 1.6 million. That's no small thing.
You know, I had wondered what the volume of air travel was doing.
Now I find out that its down nearly 75% over the Thanksgiving weekend over the last 10 years.
And the decline is steady throughout a bust and boom, and bust again, which tells you something else must be involved.
I'd like to think that its people who are offended by security theater, but I doubt it. Maybe that contributes, at the margin.
Looking at that chart, I don't know how any airlines are still solvent.
People started opting out when they discovered that their baggage was being rifled through.
The airlines added to it when they started jacking up the price of travel by charging for each checked bag.
There simply hasn't been a time in the last 10 years when the hassle of flying has been reduced even microscopically.
I'd like to think that its people who are offended by security theater, but I doubt it.
On that you are wrong. I don't know where the MSM gets the people they survey, but the people I travel with have very different opinions.
I have to travel for my job, often a lot more than I'd like to. I have so many frequent flier miles that I usually get free first class upgrades (which makes up the majority of the people you see sitting in first class btw).
I spend a lot of time with both frequent and infrequent travelers. Everybody these days will tell you that flying is more hassle than it's worth, and everybody avoids it nowadays to the greatest possible extent.
They'll rifle through your carry on, and put it back in the suitcase haphazardly. I've had things broken and found that there is virtually no recourse with TSA. So there are lots of things you just don't take with you.
Last time I got selected for "extra screening" (less than two months ago) they took absolutely everything out of my wallet. Because I guess you never know what somebody might be hiding in all that lint. They literally started by asking me what time my flight left, and they "screened" me up to the last possible moment. I guess they figured that if I scrambled really fast I could still make the plane (I barely did but there was no room left in overhead bins for my luggage so they forced me to check one of my bags, grrrr -- and I was in first class).
Nobody that travels with any regularity is happy with the TSA. But nobody is under the illusion that we the peons can actually do anything about it, either. I've seen more than few TSA employees, that were just looking for half an excuse to bust somebody's chops. Because they can.
I'm sure unionized TSA employees will be far superior.
From time to time there are things people won't put up with and which are then discontinued for at least a time. After advertising movies started in theaters as part of the program in the 1920s, they were abandoned in view of customer outrage, and resumed only recently. The Know Your Customer regs at banks were dropped for a few years, only to be revived with the terror. Coca Cola Classic came in after less than a year of the New Coke.
To be fair, the New Coke thing was a scam to get in on HFCS. Gotta love those sugar tariffs/corn subsidies.
For me I have seen people reverse on their feelings because of the recent tree lighting bomb scare.
Do you mean the one our own FBI concocted? As soon as my ultra-lib BiL told me about this over the weekend, I asked him, "Is this the same one where the FBI ran an extremely lame sting operation and managed to hook 4 losers?" I had no idea* they were stupid enough to try it a 2nd time. Methinks there are more in the woodwork.
Maybe they should search their feelings of the FBI.
*OK, I did.
Tree lighting bomb scare? What'd they do, read The Mothman Prophecies?
While there are some of us who are offended enough to raise hell, I think the majority of people just don't want to risk missing their flight. That $500 non-refundable ticket in hand tends to sway a person's decision.
There's also the fact that if you have to travel for work, it would not put you in a good light with your employer to object to travel -- or to become known as someone who makes waves.
I believe most people who travel in recent years, are doing it because they have to for their jobs. Are you really going to miss a flight while you're on the job, because you wanted to make waves over all of this?
There are lots of people out there looking for jobs. Even if you want to make waves, you probably won't do it while on the job.
Good news for all you business travelers!
I'm an electrician, and the big trend lately has been "telepresence rooms". Think of a skype connection with first class cameras and seating for six on each end. We've been installing a bunch lately.
The opt-out didn't fizzle - the body-scan machines weren't in use!
http://www.redstate.com/laboru.....t-out-day/
I was working in the background.
Isn't it kind of hard to opt out when the machines aren't being used?
I traveled by air over thanksgiving and I didn't have to use the scanners at Boston or Washington Dulles, although both airports had them in place. It was easy to get in line for the metal detectors. It seems like the TSA punted this time around.
Of course they did. How else could they maintain that people didn't opt-out?
Yeah -- I didn't expect to protest to garner a lot of support, but that number is much too reminiscent of a Soviet election result. Something else was obviously going on -- and I assume it was the TSAr quietly shutting down the new scanners for much of the day.
Thank God there was no incident the system worked!
TSA: 46,961
USA: 39
(Plus one write-in for Heywood Jablowmi)
Weird. I flew out of San Angelo a few weeks ago, and I swear they had a porn scanner, but I just walked through the metal detector, picked up my bag, and went on. No porn scan, no gate grope, no nothin'. And the TSA crew at San Angelo is hard-core (mostly ex-military, as near as I can tell).
They say (uh yeah) that you only get extra screening if you go beep at the metal detector.
I never go beep.
No. The porn scan is a primary scan. We have them at every gate at my home airport. But they only seem to turn them on sporadically. There really seems to be no rhyme or reason to when they use them -- although the stated goal is to eventually use them on everyone.
They scan you for porn?
you only get extra screening if you go beep at the metal detector.
Tell me about it.
All MSM accounts that I have seen have said that people are selected "randomly" for scope-or-grope. The number I've seen is 2%, but I've seen no primary source for that.
"Randomly," however, apparently means that the TSOs (rather than some ticketing computer that can simulate randomness) pick who gets scope-or-groped.
As a result, it may be that a) people who look less likely to object or b) people who might look good naked are more likely to be selected for scoping.
Interestingly, terrorists probably look like they are likely to object, and would be unlikely to look good naked.
Would Reason support an El Al/Israeli approach to frisking and searching? Or would that kind of racial/ethnic profiling be another form of invasion of civil liberties? How does one attempt to reconcile airbourne security needs with civil liberties? Are the liberties absolute or can we look at them on some kind of cost/benefit basis- ie. getting the most safety for the least intrusion?
Airport security is an economic issue. Let the market handle it.
Does anyone really know--I mean thru direct experience--what it is the Israelis actually do? Do they profile and question? Detain you for an hour? Do a strip search if you are suspicious and fit a profile? Do we really want to be doing whatever it is that they do?
I dont have any direct experience. My understanding is that most Arab/Muslim flyers will get questioned, and some get searched throughly-read an anecdote about emptying out toothpaste tubes to check for explosives. I have no idea how many or how often. Havent read about strip searches in this context...mainly just detailed questioning and luggage searching, but that might not be the whole story. Basically if you are a young man from Pakistan or Saudi Arabia or whatever you can expect to get all your belongings rifled through, especially if your answers to their questions dont allay their concerns. If you are Canadian Arab and your passport has a Saudi stamp in it, expect the same.
That is my understanding, not based on personal experience.
I don't know if we want to do what they do, that is what I am asking. Is it better to profile or not? It seems asinine to me to subject grandmothers to the same level of intrusiveness as young men.
I flew Friday night out and Friday night back, with scanners used both times. For the outbound leg they appeared to send people through the scanner whenever it was empty -- more than 20%. On the return leg they sent them through less frequently.
On that outbound leg, I was selected for the scanner. The TSA woman accosted me as I was heading for the metal detector and told me to empty my pockets completely. Only after I confusedly emptied nonmetals from my pockets did she actually tell me I needed to go into the scanner. I told her "I choose the alternative" and was made to wait at the side for a couple minutes until someone could attend to me. He was quite polite, explained things fully, and gave a not particularly intrusive pat-down.
Afterward he asked why I didn't want to do the scan. I didn't say anything, until he said I had to say something -- implying he had to put something on some form.
What, no right to remain silent?
I had to say something -- implying he had to put something on some form.
Like "I think a human does a better job than a machine"?
Tell them that if you go through the scanner that you turn into a large, angry green monster with superior strength and great leaping ability.
The real reason is that I want to know what is being done to me. I don't know what is going on with the scan, but I sure as hell know what is going on with the pat down.
It's the same reason I never choose general anesthesia if there is an alternative.
At the time I could not articulate this reason, so I just said "privacy".
Although next time I'll try angry green monster.
My view is the only appropriate way to check a pair of hooters like that is with another pair of hooters...might have to oil them up to get good sliding action... It takes a boob to know a boob...
I had thought that the protest was a bad idea, and would have little support.
There are two reasons for this.
First, many of us avoid flying already, and those who are the most sick of this crap are probably not even going to be at the airport during Thanksgiving weekend. If someone already hates the process of flying 2010-style, he/she will REALLY hate it on Thanksgiving!
Second, there was no good plan for what this would accomplish. It would likely make the participants' lives into more of a living hell than they'd be already, flying around on Thanksgiving weekend. And for what?
A protest would either have to be FUN for participants, or planned to overwhelm the stupid system. To really succeed, it would have to be both.
And still, most people who fly are just trying to get somewhere, often not by choice, or perhaps under in-law duress. They just want to get it over with.
A REALLY effective protest would involve a hell of a lot of people buying tickets when they don't care where they go, or if they even get there, THEN overwhelming the system in ways that are really fun for the participants.
One possibility: a bunch of us could dress up as Indians, sneak into the airport under cover of darkness, and pitch all of the TSA agents through open gangplank doors onto the tarmac a story or two down. The Boston TSA Party, as it were.
Yes, it would involve many violent felonies, Federal felonies, etc., and a lot of people would have a moral objection to pitching other people 25 feet down onto asphalt. But it's an idea. Anything short of that probably wouldn't get any attention from the suck-up authoritarian press, or the faculty lounge liberal in the White House.
Note to the DHS computers: I'm not serious.
That didn't help the guy who jokingly tweeted about blowing up an airport in the UK. They'll be at your door soon, Barry. Face the Telescreen and follow its instructions until they get there.
I hope we don't see another academic in power for a long fucking time.
As someone with an advanced degree, I know very well that academics live in theoretical bubbles, and very rarely get to understand anything that doesn't happen in a book published by an academic press with the proper academic credentials.
They have no goddamn business whatsoever making public policy decisions on any level.
Boycott Flying COMPLETELY, until sanity returns! Please join us: http://www.facebook.com/pages/.....1010710392
I've effectively done that, but they'd never know. To have an effective boycott, the target has to suffer serious financial loss, and has to know why.
A lot of us just don't fly, or don't fly if there is any reasonable alternative whatsoever, when in the past we actually enjoyed it. But planes are still full.
"To have an effective boycott, the target has to suffer serious financial loss, and has to know why."
The only thing that would accomplish is a government take-over of bankrupt airlines.
Airlines should be kissing the dicks of their customers right now, instead of trying to squeeze more and more out of their shrinking customer base.
How many planes are in the air anymore?
I'd wager fleet size has been decreasing.
When you can't expand, buy up the competition (when was the last "new" airport built and when was the last "merger")
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata..... Fleet.htm
thanks