No-Fly Zone: Can You Feel Me?

It's time to Break It Down!

“If you touch my junk, I’m gonna have you arrested!” Those now famous words were uttered by 31 year-old Oceanside, California resident, John Tyner, last Saturday morning at the San Diego Airport. The e-viral phrase is akin to “the shot heard ‘round the world,” or at least around America, in the rapidly escalating protest against TSA’s (Transportation Security Administration) latest efforts to increase the level and effectiveness of airport security.

Tyner, who maintained he was trying to keep it light when he uttered his response to the new-style pat down, taped the audio on his cell phone, and later posted his account of the events on his personal blog. His actions added fuel to an already rapidly growing controversy over the latest TSA rules.

While his initial intent may have been to down play the encounter, it is fair to say, the ensuing results have accorded Mr. Tyner his allotted “15 minutes of fame.” I am not a frequent flyer, so I do not have the best insight into the apparent increasing levels of difficulty confronting persons who fly regularly. With that point stipulated, I admit I find more than a little confounding, the rising decibel level accompanying the TSA rules.

What seems clear at this point is Mr. Tyner is likely to be viewed as the poster child for an emerging movement of guerilla tactics to push back against the most recent rules that the Homeland Security Department’s TSA has instituted, requiring full-body scanning, by machine or pat down. That is unfortunate. I am really focused not so much on Tyner, but upon the larger debate about the wide-spread resistance to the TSA rules.

The new rules have garnered unfavorable reactions from many sources, including some pilots’ groups, individual flyers, bloggers, various interest groups, and critics from other nations. Expressions of resistance were wide-spread before Tyner’s encounter. However, his audio recording made his experience effectively, “on the record.” That dimension creates the prospect of a proverbial game changer.

Commercial flying, as we knew it, forever changed September 11, 2001. That day, which became etched indelibly in the American psyche as simply, 9/11, ushered in a new age of complications for the flying public, and what would previously have been considered time-consuming inconveniences. Shortly after that time, I began flying at least twice a month to locations as near as Washington, DC (I flew into BWI six days after 9/11), and Atlanta, and as far away as Portland and San Diego. It is fair to say the culture of flying changed instantly, or at least as quickly as planes returned to the sky.

Since that day, nine years ago, the rules of engagement for flying have become increasing complex and unintuitive. Critics of the recent changes argue these most recent changes are unnecessary, inefficient, ineffective, and "waaay" too invasive. I know several individuals who read this post fly often. I heartily invite anyone, but especially that group to share your insights and reactions to today’s blog.

One of my favorite commercials from “back in the day,” included the tag-line, “This is not your father’s Oldsmobile.” Of course, given our current economic reality, a fair question would be, “What is an Oldsmobile?” Nevertheless, my point is commercial flying, as noted above, is not what it used to be. Moreover, it likely will never again be as it were, pre-9/11.

So, what about those guerrilla tactics I referenced earlier? Well, a number of individuals and groups are urging persons who will be flying on the day before Thanksgiving to opt-out of being screened by the full-body scanning machines. This year, that day falls on November 24th, and is also known to be the busiest flying day of the year.

The effect of opting-out en masse, as the proponents of the scheme envision, would be to clog up the aviation system for the day, by requiring all passengers to be patted down or strip-searched. By executing this mode of “creative resistance,” the flying public would send a message of protest about the untenable nature of the TSA rules and full-body scanning machines. Or so the proposal’s organizers and proponents argue. I suppose those who just happen to be flying the day before Thanksgiving, and have nothing better to do than spend an extra day in an airport, possibly miss your flight and or connections, and immerse yourself in the undeniable (and unavoidable) ambiance (ifyou would call it that) of the flyers who would rather not be impeded by this incredibly selfish diversion, it’s a great idea.

I have already admitted that I am not a frequent flyer; moreover, I have no plans to fly on November 24th. In that regard, the opt-out day should not impact me. That being said, it is my opinion that using the “reasonable person” test, due to current conditions, full-body scanners are a viable tool for helping to protect the flying public.

In a conversation with a person who flies more frequently than I, was told my view was intolerant, and did not allow space for people who maintained a different opinion. That individual added just because it was reasonable to me didn’t make it reasonable. Point taken; even though as a blog, this post is a “reflection of my opinion,” I labor under the illusion that when I make a reasonable person assessment, I am not the only person included. To that end, I note that in a recent CBS Poll, 81% of respondents indicated full-body scanners should be used, while 15% said no (3% margin of error). A separate poll conducted by TripAdvisor.com found that that 76% of those polled preferred the full-body scanning machine to pat downs.

Not surprisingly, Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security, and John Pistole, TSA Administrator, have defended the use of the full-body scanner, and the practice of employing pat downs. These methods of maintaining airport security represent two components of a three-part menu of options provided to flyers. The third option is to choose not to fly. In the grand scheme of things, reasonable people can disagree. After nine years of living in a Post-9/11 world, this is the point at which we have arrived in the debate on maintaining safety for the public flying out of American airports.

Finally, the obvious should not be left unstated.  We live in a politically charged environment.  If and when another terror event is fielded domestically, there will be all manner of second guessing about what authorities did not do, did not do well, and/or did not do properly.  Ms. Napolitano and Mr. Pistone are attempting to exercise leadership, take accountability, and act responsibly, in advance of potential terror-driven behavior, which intelligence agencies suggest is increasingly likely.  It is also both plausible and likely that having devised and executed measures to systematically reduce safety will be characterized as careless and irresponsible in the wake of a disaster.  Of course, it will be too late then. 

Clearly, the debate on this subject is not over; the rules of the friendly skies may change. Secretary Napolitano has indicated that she is open to listening flyers' concerns. For now, however, the options are: entertain the full-body, scan, accept the pat down, or, welcome to the “"No-Fly Zone.” Can you feel me?"

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/15/AR2010111501824.html

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/15/the-full-body-backlash/?sort=oldest&offset=2&scp=2&sq=airport%20security%20protests&st=cse

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/nov/14/tsa-ejects-oceanside-man-airport-refusing-security/

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-travel-briefcase-20101108,0,6689313.story

http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/fl-scan-opt-out-protest-20101116,0,5308482.story

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/11/16/airport_body_scans_patdowns_draw_fresh_complaints/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYykxMupiT0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8XnZPVcXhM

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-12/travel/travel.screening_1_body-scanners-pat-downs-travel-companies?_s=PM:TRAVEL

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2010/11/15/protesting-the-tsas-security-checks/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/15/john-tyner-videos_n_783678.html

http://www.wtsp.com/news/topstories/story.aspx?storyid=156163&catid=250

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/fl-scan-opt-out-protest-20101116,0,3041228.story

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/one_man_airport_body_scan_protest_8sYMhk7jvZIaNsCwOyGAAP

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpps/news/airport-body-scan-protest-becomes-internet-hit-dpgonc-20101115-fc_10625001

http://www.examiner.com/populist-in-national/stop-overreacting-to-tsa-screening-procedures

http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2010/11/14/public-protests-as-tsa-torpedoes-constitution/

http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/national/one-man-airport-body-scan-protest-becomes-internet-hit-25-ncx-20101115

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Security

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/7190584_national_optout_day_is_a_revolt_against_tsaenhanced_pat_downs_and_naked_body_scans

http://www.optoutday.com/

http://wewontfly.com/opt-out-day/

http://www.smartertravel.com/blogs/today-in-travel/group-plans-national-opt-out-day-to-protest-airport-security.html?id=6240002

http://news.travel.aol.com/2010/11/15/napolitano-defends-body-scanners-and-pat-downs/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_S._Pistole