My email to "Wired" magazine story about a "cute" female airline passenger scanned 3X
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/02/female-body-scans/
LIGHTLY EDITED
OPPOSITE GENDER PAT DOWN MANDATORY once you enter the screening zone if no same gender TSO is on duty. That is the letter of the law anyway. In practice they will let you leave without the fine I presume -- but you are not getting on a plane without the 4X genital grope, etc.
http://www.airsafe.com/issues/security/tsa-sop-not-redacted.pdf
*********
4.3.14. OPPOSITE GENDER SCREENING
Extraordinary circumstances [not extraordinary at small airports I have read] may occur where a TSO of the same gender as the individual being screened (the gender of an idividual is determined by who he or she presents themselves to be]) is not available to complete HHMD and/or pat-down screening procedures (for example, staffing shortage emergencies at any airport or limited staffing at Category II, III, and IV airports). Under these staffing shortage emergencies, screening procedures for individuals of the opposite gender, as provided for in this Section, are authorized and STSOs must apply the following procedures.
A. The following notifications must be made within 24 hours of each new staffing shortage event:
1) The STSO must notify the FSD, specifying the anticipated duration of the staffing shortage. The STSO must provide subsequent updates to the FSD if the reported duration is exceeded.
2) The STSO must maintain a count of the number of passengers affected during the staffing shortage and report these numbers to the FSD after the shortage is resolved. No personal or identifying information must be taken from the passenger for purposes of this report. For example, “three female passengers underwent opposite gender screening at Airport X” is an adequate count; however, including the names of the three female passengers in the count would be inappropriate. [my note: Do Touch; Don't Tell]
3) The FSD must in turn notify the Area Director, who must monitor such reports and consider how the patterns of staffing shortages, if any, can be addressed. The Area Director or his or her designee must notify the Office of Civil Rights of the staffing shortage and provide a copy of the report indicating the number of passengers subjected to opposite gender screening at each affected airport.
B. The STSO must ensure that the following notice is provided to an individual of the opposite gender before the individual enters the WTMD:
1) A TSO of the same gender as the individual presents him or herself to be is not available.
2) A TSO of the opposite gender will be required to complete the screening process, which may include physical contact between the TSO and the individual.
3) An LTSO or STSO, if possible, will be present.
4) Once the individual enters the WTMD, the individual must complete the screening process.
*********
MY WORST SHOCK UPON RESEARCHING FURTHER: Male police all over the country apparently have no qualms at all about frisking females, mostly heel of the hand risking breasts but otherwise heavily all over hips and legs -- convenience rules if you believe what police say on the net anyway -- I haven't seen it in real life; but I don't live on the poor side of town.
If you touch my wife I should be able to get you arrested:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NI7JEA4iK4
Leg and breast frisk 1st minute -- released 10th minute:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RxH1CnYhd8Police "cadets" at play (presumably over 18), at 2:00 :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1-dcSUDPE8&NR=1
Angela Hellenbrand received a quick pat down Tuesday by security guard Mike Couts
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/us_news/2010/Nov/24/full_body_scanners_popping_up_at_courthouses.html
My take on "officer safety":
No arrested female yet has done the Houdini and slipped her cuffs and then done the "Incredible Hulk" and torn aside the police car partition, then taken a sharp object from her bra and scratched the arresting officer. Police themselves say they can frisk for a gun without touching anything with their fingers.
Police think the following California law for instance leaves opposite sex frisking all up to convenience -- even for private security!"When ever possible have a security guard/proprietary private security officer of the same sex conduct the frisk, and always try to have witnesses to the frisk."
http://www.bsis.ca.gov/forms_pubs/poa.pdf (see page 57)
My take on the (felony) legal implications (this is about battering not popping open a glove compartment, i.e., constitutional privacy -- equal protection works though):
Police delusionally see it in terms of simply professionals doing a job -- even liken themselves to doctors (maybe if they anesthetize the female and don't tell here they did it)! Coming soon to high school security near you (no legal or substantive difference)?!
I see it in terms of subjecting the female to the experience of sexual battery -- there can be no doubt about that. It is up to the criminal justice system to explain why -- and how -- the experience of sexual battery is not sexual battery just because a government functionary is performing a government function.
******
THE SECTION BELOW IS IN FIRST DRAFT
[added on after original email and post]: I don't know but it may have come to a high school near you in Los Angeles. The stories below show possibly massive arrests, cuffing and searching (frisking?) of Los Angles high school students (47,000 tickets for sure) -- meaning massive search contacts with perfectly everyday kids who did nothing more than arrive a little late for school (allowing the bird brains who run Los Angeles to take that for violating the school hours curfew -- intended to prevent truancy -- and grabbing kids away from school for the trip to the police station).
http://www.calendow.org/Article.aspx?id=5643
http://thestir.cafemom.com/teen/133267/teens_should_not_be_handcuffed
"Early-morning police "sweeps" that netted kids as they approached schools inspired a movement to protest students being handcuffed and then forced to miss more school to go to juvenile court to deal with tickets."
"Juan and his cousin, who's also 15, were one block from school when school officers stopped them, handcuffed them and searched them. When Juan said, "You can't do this," an officer used profanity and told him to "shut ... up or else I'll slap you in the face," according to the complaint."
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/02/21/v-print/139530/los-angeles-weighs-impacts-of.html
"Nabil [a student whose story and received wide coverage], who's turning 18 this month and hopes to become a doctor, was a senior at Roybal Learning Center when he was twice handcuffed and prevented by school police from attending classes that he was late for but urgently trying to get to." Again, how many of the 47,000 were cuffed and searched and how searched -- and by whom?http://libertyhill.typepad.com/main/2011/11/speaking-out-for-students.html
Belatedly, Chief of Police Steven K. Zipperman says: “Nor is truancy, by itself, a justification for “frisks, the use of handcuffs or physical restraints, and searches.” Of course what I am worried about is what happens in the searches of females by males. Think our male "cadet" finger frisking our female above -- they seem to think nothing of it.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/10/la-school-police-fewer-trua
ncy-tickets.html
So back to the question: Do you want the police attitude that a male can frisk a woman's hips, legs and bottom of her bra line (assuming he is trained to be that "careful" -- no real legal line in their view) as casually as wiping down a windshield -- because that is clearly the attitude of the officers pictured above (and who knows how many more -- most?!) -- coming to a school near you? In light of this massive cuff and search story the school kid question seems to have too real everyday relevance.
If not, reflect that there is no substantive, legal or constitutional difference between your daughter facing a Los Angeles school cop (who seem to have written 13,000 of the 47,000 summonses) on the stairway or in the hallway -- or a private security guard in a movie or book store and the poor women being victimized in the videos above. It's all or nothing at all.
http://www.airsafe.com/issues/security/tsa-sop-not-redacted.pdf
*********
4.3.14. OPPOSITE GENDER SCREENING
Extraordinary circumstances [not extraordinary at small airports I have read] may occur where a TSO of the same gender as the individual being screened (the gender of an idividual is determined by who he or she presents themselves to be]) is not available to complete HHMD and/or pat-down screening procedures (for example, staffing shortage emergencies at any airport or limited staffing at Category II, III, and IV airports). Under these staffing shortage emergencies, screening procedures for individuals of the opposite gender, as provided for in this Section, are authorized and STSOs must apply the following procedures.
A. The following notifications must be made within 24 hours of each new staffing shortage event:
1) The STSO must notify the FSD, specifying the anticipated duration of the staffing shortage. The STSO must provide subsequent updates to the FSD if the reported duration is exceeded.
2) The STSO must maintain a count of the number of passengers affected during the staffing shortage and report these numbers to the FSD after the shortage is resolved. No personal or identifying information must be taken from the passenger for purposes of this report. For example, “three female passengers underwent opposite gender screening at Airport X” is an adequate count; however, including the names of the three female passengers in the count would be inappropriate. [my note: Do Touch; Don't Tell]
3) The FSD must in turn notify the Area Director, who must monitor such reports and consider how the patterns of staffing shortages, if any, can be addressed. The Area Director or his or her designee must notify the Office of Civil Rights of the staffing shortage and provide a copy of the report indicating the number of passengers subjected to opposite gender screening at each affected airport.
B. The STSO must ensure that the following notice is provided to an individual of the opposite gender before the individual enters the WTMD:
1) A TSO of the same gender as the individual presents him or herself to be is not available.
2) A TSO of the opposite gender will be required to complete the screening process, which may include physical contact between the TSO and the individual.
3) An LTSO or STSO, if possible, will be present.
4) Once the individual enters the WTMD, the individual must complete the screening process.
*********
MY WORST SHOCK UPON RESEARCHING FURTHER: Male police all over the country apparently have no qualms at all about frisking females, mostly heel of the hand risking breasts but otherwise heavily all over hips and legs -- convenience rules if you believe what police say on the net anyway -- I haven't seen it in real life; but I don't live on the poor side of town.
If you touch my wife I should be able to get you arrested:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NI7JEA4iK4
Leg and breast frisk 1st minute -- released 10th minute:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RxH1CnYhd8Police "cadets" at play (presumably over 18), at 2:00 :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1-dcSUDPE8&NR=1
Angela Hellenbrand received a quick pat down Tuesday by security guard Mike Couts
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/us_news/2010/Nov/24/full_body_scanners_popping_up_at_courthouses.html
My take on "officer safety":
No arrested female yet has done the Houdini and slipped her cuffs and then done the "Incredible Hulk" and torn aside the police car partition, then taken a sharp object from her bra and scratched the arresting officer. Police themselves say they can frisk for a gun without touching anything with their fingers.
Police think the following California law for instance leaves opposite sex frisking all up to convenience -- even for private security!"When ever possible have a security guard/proprietary private security officer of the same sex conduct the frisk, and always try to have witnesses to the frisk."
http://www.bsis.ca.gov/forms_pubs/poa.pdf (see page 57)
My take on the (felony) legal implications (this is about battering not popping open a glove compartment, i.e., constitutional privacy -- equal protection works though):
Police delusionally see it in terms of simply professionals doing a job -- even liken themselves to doctors (maybe if they anesthetize the female and don't tell here they did it)! Coming soon to high school security near you (no legal or substantive difference)?!
I see it in terms of subjecting the female to the experience of sexual battery -- there can be no doubt about that. It is up to the criminal justice system to explain why -- and how -- the experience of sexual battery is not sexual battery just because a government functionary is performing a government function.
******
THE SECTION BELOW IS IN FIRST DRAFT
[added on after original email and post]: I don't know but it may have come to a high school near you in Los Angeles. The stories below show possibly massive arrests, cuffing and searching (frisking?) of Los Angles high school students (47,000 tickets for sure) -- meaning massive search contacts with perfectly everyday kids who did nothing more than arrive a little late for school (allowing the bird brains who run Los Angeles to take that for violating the school hours curfew -- intended to prevent truancy -- and grabbing kids away from school for the trip to the police station).
http://www.calendow.org/Article.aspx?id=5643
http://thestir.cafemom.com/teen/133267/teens_should_not_be_handcuffed
"Early-morning police "sweeps" that netted kids as they approached schools inspired a movement to protest students being handcuffed and then forced to miss more school to go to juvenile court to deal with tickets."
"Juan and his cousin, who's also 15, were one block from school when school officers stopped them, handcuffed them and searched them. When Juan said, "You can't do this," an officer used profanity and told him to "shut ... up or else I'll slap you in the face," according to the complaint."
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/02/21/v-print/139530/los-angeles-weighs-impacts-of.html
"Nabil [a student whose story and received wide coverage], who's turning 18 this month and hopes to become a doctor, was a senior at Roybal Learning Center when he was twice handcuffed and prevented by school police from attending classes that he was late for but urgently trying to get to." Again, how many of the 47,000 were cuffed and searched and how searched -- and by whom?http://libertyhill.typepad.com/main/2011/11/speaking-out-for-students.html
Belatedly, Chief of Police Steven K. Zipperman says: “Nor is truancy, by itself, a justification for “frisks, the use of handcuffs or physical restraints, and searches.” Of course what I am worried about is what happens in the searches of females by males. Think our male "cadet" finger frisking our female above -- they seem to think nothing of it.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/10/la-school-police-fewer-trua
ncy-tickets.htmlSo back to the question: Do you want the police attitude that a male can frisk a woman's hips, legs and bottom of her bra line (assuming he is trained to be that "careful" -- no real legal line in their view) as casually as wiping down a windshield -- because that is clearly the attitude of the officers pictured above (and who knows how many more -- most?!) -- coming to a school near you? In light of this massive cuff and search story the school kid question seems to have too real everyday relevance.
If not, reflect that there is no substantive, legal or constitutional difference between your daughter facing a Los Angeles school cop (who seem to have written 13,000 of the 47,000 summonses) on the stairway or in the hallway -- or a private security guard in a movie or book store and the poor women being victimized in the videos above. It's all or nothing at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment