Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › DISASTER!!! TSA took my amps!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DISASTER!!! TSA took my amps!!! - Page 8  

post #106 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by acs236
Before we get to the 4th Amendment, we have to know whether there is anything in the agreement that covers your airline ticket that consents the search and seizure.
Doesn't matter. No matter what "agreement", "law" or "contract" is signed in America it NEVER overrides a Constitutional right. NEVER.
post #107 of 195
Quote:
Since we now know that there are potential issues around the transport of our portable electronics, how do we now deal with it? Has anyone called TSA to determine the best way to deal with transporting portable electronics? What are their procedures? Would showing up a bit early help? Is there a special check-through one might request as a pre-emptive measure? What should one do if one's portable electronics are seized? Are there receipts available? What is the procedure one need go through to retrieve one's gear? If wronged, is there a grievance procedure? Is asking for a supervisor a particularly helpful exercise? What exactly ARE our rights in a situation of this nature?
Well said elrod-tom.

I have always looked at the situation as one of getting used to, rather than finding out about. It will clearly always be a pain in the arse, however your suggestions could make it less so. I still maintain that (as is the case with the airline industry in general) it will take a good while to work the kinks out of the system.

Right now the whole shebang is out of whack, and it is my belief that it will take YEARS to sort out. As the goverment allows the airlines to break union contracts so that they can reinvent themselves by going to a lower cost structure, so will the TSA have to invent itself for the first time. This is an unprecedented time and calls for measures that we have been unacustomed to. As e-t stated, we need to find out what our rights are and how to best accomidate our hobbies traveling. And as I stated before, I am willing to bet that at some point there will be a special check station for items that people would like to declare for early inspection.

Another thing to remember that the airline industry is not just a US enterprise. It is international in scope and each country will have their own security standards. Our rights may be quite different in each situation.

Slightly off topic here, but as a person who's family has been somewhat affected (Due to loss of employment...thankfully remedied as of last week. She's back in the saddle, training for new duty as a flight attendant. ) by the airline crisis, I believe that we are ultimately heading back to a time when most people cannot afford to fly on a regular basis (as we have all become used to). Yes, for the time being fares will be low and competition fierce, but IMHO, in cannot last. At some point--after all the reorganizations are complete--airlines will begin charging more, but rather than the business traveler paying the lion's share allowing for a cheap seats on part of the plane, all passengers will be paying a higher price to fly.

This is just my opinon and I could be way wrong, but I just think that when things stablize, we are in for a round of higher prices, especially if oil prices remain high, otherwise how can they remain in business for the long haul?

gb
post #108 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake
Doesn't matter. No matter what "agreement", "law" or "contract" is signed in America it NEVER overrides a Constitutional right. NEVER.
It does matter - if you've made prior consent to it, it's no longer an "unreasonable" search and seizure - it's actually quite reasonable.

It's not that the constitution prohibits search and seizure - just unreasonable search and seizure, and I think what was done in this case was well within the realm of being reasonable. Could they have handled it better? Perhaps. Putting a system in place to make sure safe goods are returned? It could be done. But we're on the leading edge of a new problem, with new responses being implemented to protect us against it, and we have to accept losses.

We (as a society) always want pure progress without setbacks or mistakes, and it's quite absurd of us to expect that.

As was said, GS is completely justified in being upset about this. But for us to start crying about violations of the constitution over this is reactionary and unproductive, not to mention without justification when one actually reads and considers the document.
post #109 of 195
What happened to Guru is not a constitutional issue based upon the information we have at the moment. The problem as I see it is that an item was taken away from him that was not included on the list of prohibited items and there seems to be no mechanism for him to get it back. Sorry, but it shouldn't a lot of time for the TSA to figure out a way to deal with the situation. Guru shouldn't be forced to bear the cost of the amp that was not prohibited because the TSA and the Airports haven't figured out a way to handle it. From the USA Today article, it seems the Airports didn't have any difficulty in finding a way to make money off the situation.
post #110 of 195
Guru, sorry to hear about this. This doesn't exactly come at the best time for you I know. This is one time when "Shh" is not the answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tyrion
From the USA Today article, it seems the Airports didn't have any difficulty in finding a way to make money off the situation.
Tyrion, wouldn't this be a problem that the TSA can confiscate ANYTHING and sell it a profit? "Hey, we need a few bucks, confiscate a few more items and let's get back in the black."
post #111 of 195
Man, that sucks!! I very nearly had a similar experience - on my way to Israel, bringing a kit of speaker parts for AdamZuf, I got called in for a highly personal conversation with the El Al security people, who for some strange reason impounded two of his small crossover boards while appearing to be fairly unconcerned about the large ones. It took quite a while, but eventually I convinced them and a supervisor decided to let me fly with them as checked baggage. I speak the language reasonably well (though not nearly as well as Adam and have been to Israel about a zillion times in recent years so I guess they decided that if I was going to make trouble I would have done so long ago.

Also, attitude helps- I did try, vigorously, to explain to them what the parts were for and why they were harmless, but I also told them that I had no problem with them putting me though the 3rd degree as long as they managed to stop the slimebags that they really needed to stop.

Anyway, you _should_ get everything back. Let us know what happens!
post #112 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spankypoo
It does matter - if you've made prior consent to it, it's no longer an "unreasonable" search and seizure - it's actually quite reasonable.

It's not that the constitution prohibits search and seizure - just unreasonable search and seizure, and I think what was done in this case was well within the realm of being reasonable. Could they have handled it better? Perhaps. Putting a system in place to make sure safe goods are returned? It could be done. But we're on the leading edge of a new problem, with new responses being implemented to protect us against it, and we have to accept losses.

We (as a society) always want pure progress without setbacks or mistakes, and it's quite absurd of us to expect that.

As was said, GS is completely justified in being upset about this. But for us to start crying about violations of the constitution over this is reactionary and unproductive, not to mention without justification when one actually reads and considers the document.
Even if you sign a "contract" you still will never give up your Constitutional rights. They can never be given or taken away, period. Not even with "consent". If you contest the agreement at a later date, the agreement will be found null and void due to being illegally constructed according to Constitutional laws and therefore never legally binding in the first place.

Nothing personal but this is what I mean about people just not knowing their rights inside their own country. If you don't know them, somebody will take them away. Exactly like this.

This is directed to EVERYONE - LEARN about how things work!!!!!

But anyway, I'm talking 4th Amendment as the stopping / top point of this, the theoretical legal basis at the foundations of the issue of why the TSA can't keep the goods. If this goes into a Constitutional legal battle it'll be the first, for sure

But like I just said, you have to know how things work in order to understand what is fundamentally right and wrong about situations like this.
post #113 of 195
Post edited by moderator - no political discussion in Member's Lounge


sucks about the TSA situation...
post #114 of 195
Ummmm, isn't there a policy on political statements being kept "Outside"?

Edit: nevermind...just read the changes for "Outside"....I'll just avoid this thread in the future. Sorry
post #115 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake
Even if you sign a "contract" you still will never give up your Constitutional rights. They can never be given or taken away, period. Not even with "consent". If you contest the agreement at a later date, the agreement will be found null and void due to being illegally constructed according to Constitutional laws and therefore never legally binding in the first place.

Nothing personal but this is what I mean about people just not knowing their rights inside their own country. If you don't know them, somebody will take them away. Exactly like this.

This is directed to EVERYONE - LEARN about how things work!!!!!

But anyway, I'm talking 4th Amendment as the stopping / top point of this, the theoretical legal basis at the foundations of the issue of why the TSA can't keep the goods. If this goes into a Constitutional legal battle it'll be the first, for sure

But like I just said, you have to know how things work in order to understand what is fundamentally right and wrong about situations like this.
::sigh:: I'm sorry you took it this direction. Mods, if my response is too much, feel free to edit to whatever extent you feel is appropriate. But his post demands a response, for clarity's sake.

I believe you didn't understand my post, so I'll try to explain.

The constitution prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, and I claim that if you fly on a public, government-regulated plane, you must agree to certain terms ahead of time, one of which being that you can't take anything onboard which would compromise the safety of the other passengers.

If those given authority to enforce that policy believe you are potentially violating it, they are well within their constitutional right to confiscate the property which they believe to be suspect. It's not like they took GS's car keys and his Blockbuster card, too - they took what they thought could be suspect. Given the stakes and the world climate, what they did, tho underinformed, hasty and poorly coordinated, was a reasonable decision.

Therefore, I'm claiming that this is not a violation of the constitution.

What's more interesting is that you're not complaining about the search performed on passengers. Search is under an equal level of constitutional protection as seizure. But you've never complained about that, and that makes your logic inconsistent. In keeping with your thinking, an x-ray, a pat-down, a metal detector is just as unconstitutional. If I put a post up saying, "I got on the plane, and they searched me! Outrageous!" how much attention would you give it? None.

It's a reasonable search, and I'd guess you would agree. This seizure was also reasonable. We give them permission to search, and if they find something they're not happy with, they seize. Knowing this, we shouldn't take things which are at risk for seizure. A home-made amp, filled with wires and parts which they're entirely unfamiliar with? Let's face it - it's not the most illogical result that it would be confiscated. We know they're not DYI-ers or EE majors. Is this a huge bummer for GS? Sure! Would I be annoyed and sad that my new amp's gone? Of course. But enough to get you bringing the U.S. Constitution? This isn't the place, and if you're going to do it, you can't do it with such faulty thinking and insulting rhetoric.

I know my rights inside my country. I appreciate your opinion that we ought to know our rights so they aren't taken away - I fully agree. But I'd look at things a little more carefully before I became so vocal.

Oh, and congrats on pointing this thread straight at closure.

::sigh::

P.S. Capital letters and exclamation points do not an argument make.
post #116 of 195
I don't know that I'd call it reasonable, but I think I'd call it a not unreasonable search and seizure. It's a subtle distinction, but an important one.

The big problem is ignorance on the part of TSA. If these guys understood a bit more about what they were looking at, there wouldn't be an issue. That's why I think that we need to engage in an exercise about how to AVOID this outcome, as opposed to simply reacting to it when it happens. That IMHO is a lot more useful than most of the commentary (most of it pretty nasty in its tone...directed at those charged with keeping you from being blown out of the sky) that I've seen in this thread thus far.

I've seen several posts that have this potentially useful thread on track to being locked down. Let's think a bit more before we post folks. Make this a useful thread, and let's find a way to give this story a happy ending.
post #117 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake
Doesn't matter. No matter what "agreement", "law" or "contract" is signed in America it NEVER overrides a Constitutional right. NEVER.
That's not true. Accused criminals often waive their right to a speedy trial as part of a plea agreement; you can waive your right to remain silent; the right to an attorney. These waivers are essentially contracts. And these are only a few examples.
post #118 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by elrod-tom
I don't know that I'd call it reasonable, but I think I'd call it a not unreasonable search and seizure. It's a subtle distinction, but an important one.
Like it or not, I think we pretty much give up any objections to search and seizure when we get on an airplane. I am not precisely sure how the law changed after 9/11, but I doubt anyone could possibly win a case because someone even remotely unusual electronics were confiscated. It's frustrating, it's unfair, but it's probably consitutional.
post #119 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by acs236
Like it or not, I think we pretty much give up any objections to search and seizure when we get on an airplane. I am not precisely sure how the law changed after 9/11, but I doubt anyone could possibly win a case because someone even remotely unusual electronics were confiscated. It's frustrating, it's unfair, but it's probably consitutional.
I'm not an attorney, but I suspect that this is probably right.

The question then becomes what to do about it. How do we head off trouble in advance. What do we do to deal with it when it comes up. This is the stuff that will make this thread valuable. I can't believe that there isn't something that one couldn't do to ensure that one's gear didn't vanish into thin air if something like this came up. I'd bet there is even a procedure somewhere in the TSA regs.
post #120 of 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by elrod-tom
I'm not an attorney, but I suspect that this is probably right.

The question then becomes what to do about it.
As I have cited in my unworthy prior post # 57....:

«Note: Check with your airline or travel agent for restrictions on the use of these and other electronic items during your flight.»

But if they have «any doubts» on the item, all the previous contacts will be out the window...

Amicalement
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › DISASTER!!! TSA took my amps!!!