Everything that happens in a US airport is under duress

Posted by dfps 1 day ago

Counter16Comment21OpenOriginal

Americans interactions with authorities rely on their consciousness of Constitutional protections, and they have accepted that in airports there is no US Constitution.

Test feeling of high vulnerability and insecurity felt there, and the awareness of the means the authorities there have at their disposal to coerce 'cooperation'.

Comments

Comment by al_borland 16 hours ago

I was at an airport in India waiting for the person I was traveling with to get grilled by security, because he didn’t have a printed itinerary. I had some awareness that a security guard was standing next to me, but didn’t think much of it. When I looked over at him, there was an automatic weapon around his neck, hanging on his chest, with the barrel point right at me. I took a few steps back to get out of the line of fire.

The TSA does seem like security theater, and is annoying, but I’ve never had an automatic weapon carelessly pointed at my head in a US airport.

Comment by dnemmers 1 day ago

I believe this is correct, but at the airport you're really faced with the reality of the situation. Everywhere else, the same mechanisms exist 'under the sheets', but there's a thin veneer of society pasted over the machine.

Comment by dfps 22 hours ago

Are we comparing USA to other countries and saying America should be held to their standards? or is USA the strongest, most worked on Constitution in the world and what happens with it is what is important?

Comment by andrei_says_ 17 hours ago

What about (insert any other favorite but irrelevant example here).

Comment by ManlyBread 5 hours ago

Thank you for your blogpost, this is exactly the type of content I want to see on a website dedicated to tech news.

Comment by sloaken 1 day ago

Here is an old article talking about this topic. Maybe old but seems relevant.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-airports-a-constitutional-tw...

Comment by kypro 20 hours ago

Can someone from the US explain why this is being upvoted, isn't this normal?

In the UK if you're in an Airport officers can question you without requiring reasonable suspicion and you must answer their questions and give them access to your devices or face charges...

Comment by esbranson 15 hours ago

> Can someone from the US explain

I want to describe it as Americans arguing with Americans and others about American things. These details under discussion we share with England (incl. Wales if you recognize the Laws in Wales Acts as including some separate place).

Comment by newguy1000 20 hours ago

cause that's despicable?

Comment by esbranson 1 day ago

One, not a US thing. Two, the US Constitution is, despite the hyperbole.

Ignorance is bliss. Americans know because we can access our US court decisions, unlike any other country in the world. (Thanks be to CourtListener and other predecessors.) The "North Koreans have more rights, look it's right there in black letter law" is laughable, despite being repeated nonstop by cough some sectors of society cough since Soviet times.

Comment by cinntaile 20 hours ago

> Americans know because we can access our US court decisions, unlike any other country in the world.

This is not a uniquely US thing?

Comment by esbranson 18 hours ago

It is. From long, long ago.

Comment by cinntaile 9 hours ago

I can access court decisions just fine and I'm not in the US, so no. It's not.

The chances are not very high that you are well-versed in how all the other countries in the world work. Whenever you think something is unique, it is quite likely that you will be wrong.

Comment by drstewart 7 hours ago

>Whenever you think something is unique, it is quite likely that you will be wrong.

Can you tell that to ask the Europeans that constantly cry "only in America" about every little thing?

Comment by cinntaile 7 hours ago

A bit of a weird tangent? You can tell them yourself. You are free to reuse my sentence if it helps.

Comment by CatalystPz 1 day ago

how

Comment by tacostakohashi 1 day ago

I don't suppose you've actually, you know, read the constitution? If so, I'd be fascinated to hear about which parts pertain to, or don't apply at airports that should?

The main thing people seem to find difficult to comprehend is that planes owned by airlines are the private property of the airline. You're pretty much welcome to buy your own plane, and use it to carry anyone and anything you want, but if you want to get on someone else's airplane, no so much.

Comment by FrankWilhoit 1 day ago

The argument is that the environment is so saturated with Federal enforcement that the airlines become de facto Federal concessionaires.

Comment by AnimalMuppet 23 hours ago

Sure, planes are private property. The airport is not. Airports are government property. And when I'm, for example, going through TSA, I'm not doing so on a plane, but rather in the airport.

Comment by tacostakohashi 21 hours ago

If you get your own plane, you won't have a problem finding a terminal without TSA.

Going through TSA is not a condition of using a government airport, it's just what happens if you use an airline.

In any case, being "government property" doesn't mean "completely free of regulation".

Comment by esbranson 19 hours ago

Municipal corporations ("cities") are not in all things the same as the government. Such as with property.