TSA Can Now Search Through Your Laptop

[Soverytired]

Interesting. Apparently border patrol agents (and soon the TSA) can now tell you to turn on your computer so they can access all your files. They do not need a warrant, they do not need reasonable cause, all they need is you and your computer crossing a border or standing in an airport.

The argument is that a computer is no different than, say, a checked bag. You brought it, so they get to inspect it.

Beyond the obvious "porn on the computer jokes" (Mesa executives take note!), does anyone else think this is a bit far reaching?

Having nothing to hide does not mean that I am comfortable with having police show up and inspect my house sans warrant just because they were driving through the neighborhood. (for example)

WTF?

http://gizmodo.com/383649/border-agents-can-frisk-your-laptop-and-gadgets-without-cause

 

[$$$4nothin]

I will be creating a background that says something to the point of TSA SUCKS, or ALL TSA AGENTS ARE IDIOTS, or Hey You TSA Guy, your a moron. Something like that

 

[CA1900]

Cue the police state supporters saying, "That's fine, I have nothing to hide," in 3...2....1....

 

[Capi_Cafre']

Beyond the obvious "porn on the computer jokes" (Mesa executives take note!), does anyone else think this is a bit far reaching?

Having nothing to hide does not mean that I am comfortable with having police show up and inspect my house sans warrant. (for example)

WTF?

http://gizmodo.com/383649/border-agents-can-frisk-your-laptop-and-gadgets-without-cause

Here's a link to a story that describes the original case in more detail. This is just another sad example of how 9/11 has been used as a pretext for the looting of our civil liberties, and it puts us a bit further down the slippery slope leading to that unwanted home inspection you mentioned. Welcome to the Gulag.

 

[xshuttlefa]

CREWPass NOW!!!!!!!

My laptop is so old and slow, the battery would die before it was fully loaded. That would be probably be viewed as suspicious. "You're a pilot, don't you make lots of money? Can't you buy something other then a 10 year old Gateway?"

 

[Flybet3]

I'll just take a pic of my self fornicating the TSA agent's wife and say "SURPRISE!!!!"

 

[Kream926]

I will be creating a background that says something to the point of TSA SUCKS, or ALL TSA AGENTS ARE IDIOTS, or Hey You TSA Guy, your a moron. Something like that

thats funny...his will probably say "you should have gone to college, YOU'RE and idiot"

 

[DoinTime]

This is just another sad example of how 9/11 has been used as a pretext for the looting of our civil liberties, and it puts us a bit further down the slippery slope leading to that unwanted home inspection you mentioned. Welcome to the Gulag.

9/11 has been used as a crutch by the Bush Administration for just about all of their crimes against our civil liberties. Benjamin Franklin once said "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither."

 

[Andy Neill]

.... does anyone else think this is a bit far reaching?

This guy thinks that airport searches for weapons by government agents without probable cause itself is a breach of Constitutional rights. You can imagine what I think of searching computers for content.

 

[Rally]

9/11 has been used as a crutch by the Bush Administration for just about all of their crimes against our civil liberties. Benjamin Franklin once said "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither."

Don't worry it will be a dem in office, no way we can put a rep in office and have them blamed on the next recession again. Its a master plan....Total world order. Have any mercury fillings?

 

[Rally]

This guy thinks that airport searches for weapons by government agents without probable cause itself is a breach of Constitutional rights. You can imagine what I think of searching computers for content.

Fact is there should be a program to positively identify pilots and crew....they need not be screened period. Its a waste of time and clouds public perception of air travel. Wanna do that with pax then keep doing it? But as the lines get longer and longer and the tickets get more and more.....your just gonna not have people fly.

 

[Minimaniac]

If I had even the slightest bit of respect for TSA screeners, I might think that computer searches are tolerable. But I refuse to let some underpaid, careless, gossiping moron have access to my financial information, banking records, and other personal information... especially in view of so many other strangers passing by. They cannot begin to know where to look for illegal or incriminating files on my computer, and they will not take the time to search my hard drive in its entirety... yet another half baked idea that requires huge losses of liberty on our part and negligible security gain.

 

[LR60BOY]

If I had even the slightest bit of respect for TSA screeners, I might think that computer searches are tolerable. But I refuse to let some underpaid, careless, gossiping moron have access to my financial information, banking records, and other personal information... especially in view of so many other strangers passing by. They cannot begin to know where to look for illegal or incriminating files on my computer, and they will not take the time to search my hard drive in its entirety... yet another half baked idea that requires huge losses of liberty on our part and negligible security gain.

Well Said! AMEN!

 

[CA1900]

thats funny...his will probably say "you should have gone to college, YOU'RE and idiot"

Whoops.

 

[sqwkvfr]

Cue the police state supporters saying, "That's fine, I have nothing to hide," in 3...2....1....

Well, in most cases, that would be me.

You see, in most of the search situations, you have a choice, if you don't want something searched, just don't bring it. For example, a bag into a ball game or onto an aircraft.

In this case, that sort of choice doesn't exist. I use my laptop for all sorts of things...it contains work records, tax returns, and a buttload of personal information that is just that....personal.

Now, I don't know the details or the merits of the case that has been mentioned, nor have I even taken the time to click the link listed above, but if what is being said above is correct, this is a clear violation of the 4th amendment of the US Constitution. One could argue the exigent circumstances exist thus the warrant requirement is not an issue, however, even with exigent circumstances, probable cause is still a burden of the state in order for them to rifle though the modern-day version of one's "papers."

The choice to leave the laptop behind -thus not subject to search- is not possible for so many traveling for business or even pleasure since the laptop is becoming many of our lives.

There are a bunch of people on this board who are won't have anything to say about this aside from some sort of emotional response saying how "wrong" it is or make a comment about some sort of juvenile "retaliation" against the agents who may search their laptop, despite the fact that they didn't make the policy and might feel the same way they do, but as someone who spent years studying search and seizure issues, carrying out said searches and instructing others on the propriety of warrantless searches, I have to say that I believe that the "bright line" has been crossed, and that this ruling won't stand.

Again, this is provided that the information provided on this thread is correct.

 

[mtsupilot376]

I may not be the first person to say it but definitely not the first person to think it...

F@CK THE TSA!

 

[sqwkvfr]

OK, well, this is not a TSA case at all....it's a customs case.

It has to do with what comes into this country, and that's a different matter than just a random search of your laptop whilst going through security in a domestic flight....there is a much lower burden on the state in order to have a reason to conduct a search.

Appeals courts MUST rule in a manner favorable to the lower court's decision......and overturn basically means that the lower court really screwed up.

In this case, you can see that the ultra-liberal 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals actually overturned a lower court ruling that said that this search was illegal.

That means that you can be that it will stand.

 

[sqwkvfr]

I may not be the first person to say it but definitely not the first person to think it...

F@CK THE TSA!

You should probably look at the article a little more closely....this was Customs and Border Patrol, not the TSA.

 

[sqwkvfr]

(and soon the TSA)

Where does it say this?....i can't find it anywhere.

 

[mtsupilot376]

Don't tell me you are actually defending those fascist thugs. Open your eyes we are living in a police state.

Its bad enough we have to be screened in the first place, but confiscations, invasions of privacy, etc. Where do we draw the line? I can't wait till those neanderthal knuckle-draggers lose their jobs and have to go back to the drive through windows where they came from.

As far as I am concerned, each and every one of those so called Toiletry Searching Agents are just as bad as the GoJets drivers out there. They didn't have to take the job in the first place. They didn't mind selling our civil liberties down the river for $13.30/hr and mediocre benefits. So F@ck Em!

 

[sqwkvfr]

Don't tell me you are actually defending those fascist thugs. Open your eyes we are living in a police state.

God, what a bunch of children.

1. The TSA was NOT and WILL NOT be involved in this type of search...this was a CUSTOMS and BORDER PATROL CASE.

2. The TSA agents at the airport didn't tell the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals that this was OK.....if you know anything about the maverick nature and liberal makeup of the 9th circuit, you'd understand that NO ONE tells them how to rule.

3. The TSA had nothing to do with this....from everything I've found on this case, it would appear that soverytired just made up the part about the TSA's "soon to be" involvement.

Get it?

 

[av8tor4239]

God, what a bunch of children.

1. The TSA was NOT and WILL NOT be involved in this type of search...this was a CUSTOMS and BORDER PATROL CASE.

2. The TSA agents at the airport didn't tell the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals that this was OK.....if you know anything about the maverick nature and liberal makeup of the 9th circuit, you'd understand that NO ONE tells them how to rule.

3. The TSA had nothing to do with this....from everything I've found on this case, it would appear that soverytired just made up the part about the TSA's "soon to be" involvement.

Get it?

What ever...

the tsa is a freaking joke.... please justify to me how taking toothpaste from the pilot that is about to operate the airplane as "captain of the ship" is protecting that same airplane? Please someone explain this to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Soverytired]

Where does it say this?....i can't find it anywhere.

You are correct. The TSA is not mentioned in this article.

Although this was a customs case, customs is part of the same agency as the TSA (that agency being Homeland Security). If you think that the TSA isn't going to allow itself to use this as precedence, then you don't understand how law enforcement agencies work.

I have read several other articles on the web where this is already happening. A couple of passengers have already been given the choice of either entering their private passwords on their laptops so the TSA can search their laptops or not get on the plane.

I don't personally expect to be impacted by this. The TSA can root around to their hearts content. Hell, they can put my spare underwear on their head while reading my e-mail for all I care. I just don't like where this is going.

Scary stuff.

 

[sqwkvfr]

If you think that the TSA isn't going to allow itself to use this as precedence, then you don't understand how law enforcement agencies work.

Yeah, I don't know how they work...I only spent the better part of a decade working for law enforcement agencies (much of that as an instructor on these very issues) and I don't understand how they work.

Let me just clarify for the impaired: This is a BORDER issue...nothing more, nothing less.

 

[sqwkvfr]

What ever...

the tsa is a freaking joke.... please justify to me how taking toothpaste from the pilot that is about to operate the airplane as "captain of the ship" is protecting that same airplane? Please someone explain this to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you understand anything?

I'm not defending the TSA....at all. I'm saying that they're not involved in this type of search and nothing in this decision gives them the authority to do so.

They have absolutely NOTHING to do with this article of this tread.

 

[Abernathy]

Didn't you idiots know that you can hide a gun in your "My Documents" folder..

 

[Soverytired]

Yeah, I don't know how they work...I only spent the better part of a decade working for law enforcement agencies (much of that as an instructor on these very issues) and I don't understand how they work.

Let me just clarify for the impaired: This is a BORDER issue...nothing more, nothing less.

I'll defer to your expertise then. I'm not some "all cops are fascists" nut . . far from it.

Nevertheless . . . it seems a precedence has been set by a federal agency to examine your hard drive in the name of "national security", without a warrant, just because you were in their presence.

Can doing the same with your laptop be far behind when at the airport in the name of "airport security"?

Remember, from this particular case, the border patrol used "national security" as the cause/excuse, but in fact they were looking for evidence of child pornography. While I certainly don't defend THAT, it hardly seems like a "national security" issue. It was an overreach, although the 9th Circuit Court disagrees, so as a matter of law, I'm wrong.

I don't expect the TSA or customs to start seizing laptops willy-nilly. However, the precedence has been set, Americans shrug, and another bit of privacy vanishes in the name of "security."

Death by 1000 cuts?

 

[sqwkvfr]

Can doing the same with your laptop be far behind when at the airport in the name of "airport security"?

I would say "yes."

The government has a much greater interest in what is allowed into this country than what is carried on board an aircraft for a domestic flight.....it's why the burden required for a search in this case is so extremely low....and why the uber-liberal 9th overturned a lower court ruling to allow it. The "scope of the search" is very wide ranging to include issues of customs enforcement....which can include electronic data.

The scope of a search for the TSA on domestic flights is limited to weapons.....and electronic data on a computer is not an immediate threat or considered hazardous to said flight.

It's not gonna happen.

 

[johndt]

It's not gonna happen.

You don't mind if I copy this down for later I hope :-D

 

[Capi_Cafre']

It's not gonna happen.

Tomorrow? Agreed. Never's a stretch. Just in case you haven't noticed, airports are where your civil liberties go to die. If you've worked in law enforcement you know how much shakes out from stuff like running a random set of plates in an idle moment stopped in traffic. If the bar for probable cause has been lowered to the mere presence of nude photos on a computer, watch out. There are quite a few powerful people who see the 4th Amendment as little more than an inconvenience-you're dreaming if you don't think that they have the juice to parlay this decision into giving the TSA the authority to randomly inspect the contents of computers.