Ex-Minn. governor sues over body scans, pat-downs

[Scotteq]

Just for Lulz: Jesse Takes on the TSA

By AMY FORLITI,
Associated Press Amy Forliti,
Associated Press – Mon Jan 24, 8:26 pm ET

MINNEAPOLIS – Former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura sued the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration on Monday, alleging full-body scans and pat-downs at airport checkpoints violate his right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Ventura is asking a federal judge in Minnesota to issue an injunction ordering officials to stop subjecting him to "warrantless and suspicionless" scans and body searches.

The lawsuit, which also names Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and TSA Administrator John Pistole as defendants, argues the searches are "unwarranted and unreasonable intrusions on Governor Ventura's personal privacy and dignity . and are a justifiable cause for him to be concerned for his personal health and well-being."

According to the lawsuit, Ventura received a hip replacement in 2008, and since then, his titanium implant has set off metal detectors at airport security checkpoints. The lawsuit said that prior to last November officials had used a non-invasive hand-held wand to scan his body as a secondary security measure.

But when Ventura set off the metal detector in November, he was instead subjected to a body pat-down and was not given the option of a scan with a hand-held wand or an exemption for being a frequent traveler, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit said the pat-down "exposed him to humiliation and degradation through unwanted touching, gripping and rubbing of the intimate areas of his body."

It claims that under TSA's policy, Ventura will be required to either go through a full-body scanner or submit to a pat-down every time he travels because he will always set off the metal detector.

Ventura, who was Minnesota governor from 1999 through 2002 and is now the host of the television program "Conspiracy Theory," did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment.

Napolitano said in December that the new technology and the pat-downs were "objectively safer for our traveling public."

The U.S. Attorney's Office did not immediately return an e-mail message seeking comment Monday.

The TSA's website says there are nearly 500 full-body scanners in use at 78 airports. The scanners show a traveler's physical contours on a computer screen that's viewed in a private room. Faces aren't shown, and the person's identity is supposedly not known to the screener reviewing the images.

Not all travelers are selected to go through the scanners, but the TSA requires people who decline to submit to pat-downs that include checks of the inside of their thighs and buttocks.

 

[Vette73]

For some reason I thought metal detectors did not pickup titanium implants. But seems newwer ones do very well.

Even though I think ventura is a nut, this seems like a good case. Can't wait to see what the courst say. My bet it will go through several appeals, both sides, before the SC steps in or they let the last ruling stand.

 

[drebo]

It's about time someone did this. Gubbment needs to be brought into check.

 

[OutHouse]

he has solid arguments.

 

[Lemon law]

I doubt Jesse has a case, the key operative word is unreasonable in unreasonable searches and seizures.

And given the fact there is no reasonableness or rationale for large groups of people called terrorists to have a well known hobby of blowing airplanes up while airborne, some reasonably security system has to be found to protect the flying public. Don't like the scans and par downs, simple, don't fly.

Hence ole Jesse fails at proving unreasonable and thereafter he has no case.

Which is not to say the TSA could not greatly reduce the hassle and indignities of the present system.

 

[Vette73]

I doubt Jesse has a case, the key operative word is unreasonable in unreasonable searches and seizures.

And given the fact there is no reasonableness or rationale for large groups of people called terrorists to have a well known hobby of blowing airplanes up while airborne, some reasonably security system has to be found to protect the flying public. Don't like the scans and par downs, simple, don't fly.

Hence ole Jesse fails at proving unreasonable and thereafter he has no case.

Which is not to say the TSA could not greatly reduce the hassle and indignities of the present system.

I would agree if this was a normal person who got pulled out once.

But in his case there is no system for those with medical implants so he will get pulled every time and searched every time.
I think that alone will be the factor between reasonable and unreasonable.

 

[CycloWizard]

Even if he wins (which I hope he will), it may not make any difference for the rest of us since it seems his suit is predicated on the fact that he's searched every time he travels. He's arguing that it's unreasonable to man-handle him every time he flies. If the courts agree with that assessment, they will still likely uphold TSA's ability to conduct such screening on a broader basis. I hope I'm wrong, but that's how it reads to me.

 

[Exterous]

Even if he wins (which I hope he will), it may not make any difference for the rest of us since it seems his suit is predicated on the fact that he's searched every time he travels. He's arguing that it's unreasonable to man-handle him every time he flies. If the courts agree with that assessment, they will still likely uphold TSA's ability to conduct such screening on a broader basis. I hope I'm wrong, but that's how it reads to me.

There will be an upsurge in the number of people getting titanium implants.

"Hey, while you're removing my appendix can you place this small piece of titanium in my body so I can get out of being scanned at the airport?"

And it's not like the terrorists couldn't get a titanium hip installed and get on the same 'do not full body pat down full body scan' list

 

[Thump553]

People that have titanium replacement parts have a card issued to them to show to airport security about it. My father had one, my brother in law does and neither had any significant problems flying.

BTW has anyone seen Ventura's TV show recently? It's hard to decide whether he has become seriously unhinged or is trying doing an act to cash in like Glen Beck. In either case it's pretty sad what he has become.

 

[Vette73]

People that have titanium replacement parts have a card issued to them to show to airport security about it. My father had one, my brother in law does and neither had any significant problems flying.

BTW has anyone seen Ventura's TV show recently? It's hard to decide whether he has become seriously unhinged or is trying doing an act to cash in like Glen Beck. In either case it's pretty sad what he has become.

The card carries no weight anymore at airports from what I have read. If the machine goes off you get pulled out.
That is Venturas point, and case.

 

[Jaskalas]

The card carries no weight anymore at airports from what I have read. If the machine goes off you get pulled out.
That is Venturas point, and case.

The point and case EVERYONE should make is that TSA is both ridiculous and unreasonable. It must not be tolerated.

 

[CycloWizard]

There will be an upsurge in the number of people getting titanium implants.

"Hey, while you're removing my appendix can you place this small piece of titanium in my body so I can get out of being scanned at the airport?"

And it's not like the terrorists couldn't get a titanium hip installed and get on the same 'do not full body pat down full body scan' list

It's not like these body scans would stop a terrorist with half a brain, either.

 

[blackangst1]

It's not like these body scans would stop a terrorist with half a brain, either.

Yep. The current TSA rules wouldnt stop another group of 9/11 style terrorists. Instead of <4" knives like they used, they could easily accomplish the same thing with a <7" screwdriver or <4" scissors...both of which are allowed.

 

[CPA]

I doubt Jesse has a case, the key operative word is unreasonable in unreasonable searches and seizures.

And given the fact there is no reasonableness or rationale for large groups of people called terrorists to have a well known hobby of blowing airplanes up while airborne, some reasonably security system has to be found to protect the flying public. Don't like the scans and par downs, simple, don't fly.

Hence ole Jesse fails at proving unreasonable and thereafter he has no case.

Which is not to say the TSA could not greatly reduce the hassle and indignities of the present system.

So what was your stance on extended wiretaps Bush put into place or the Patriot Act that Obama has yet reverse?

I have my guesses, but I'd like to hear from you.

 

[drebo]

Yep. The current TSA rules wouldnt stop another group of 9/11 style terrorists. Instead of <4" knives like they used, they could easily accomplish the same thing with a <7" screwdriver or <4" scissors...both of which are allowed.

Or they could bypass commercial airlines all together and crash a C4-laden Cessna into the Superboal, killing 80,000 people instead of just 200.

Why? Because chartered and private flights are neither searched nor controlled nor regulated.

This whole thing is like trying to dam the Mississippi with a single 2x12. It doesn't accomplish anything.

 

[Scotteq]

Or they could bypass commercial airlines all together and crash a C4-laden Cessna into the Superboal, killing 80,000 people instead of just 200.
Why? Because chartered and private flights are neither searched nor controlled nor regulated.

This whole thing is like trying to dam the Mississippi with a single 2x12. It doesn't accomplish anything.

Cropduster full of chemical or nerve or bio agents. Lest you laugh, know that Iran, Pakistan, etc do posess these...


and the grammar nazi in me compels: "Super Bowl"

 

[WHAMPOM]

Show'em Jesse, just disrobe and walk through sky clad.

 

[dainthomas]

Don't like the scans and par downs, simple, don't fly.

So if I live in Seattle and am required to attend a conference in Honolulu, I should quit my job if I don't like intrusive and ineffective government searches.

 

[Scotteq]

So if I live in Seattle and am required to attend a conference in Honolulu, I should quit my job if I don't like intrusive and ineffective government searches.

I think that's kind of an extreme position. I would expect (and fully support) taking a stance where you don't travel at all, unless the benefit far outweighs the inconveniences. Not to mention the little side benefit of not having to pay the airlines, and - via the loss in profitability - get the airlines to lobby for a clear~er and more sustainable ruleset.

My company teleconferences LOTS, travels little.

 

[xj0hnx]

So if I live in Seattle and am required to attend a conference in Honolulu, I should quit my job if I don't like intrusive and ineffective government searches.

You'll have to forgive Lemon, he truely loves his government overlords.