Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
TSA Chief John Pistole Won't Fine John Tyner In Patdown Flap
Share:
by NowPublic Staff | November 17, 2010 at 01:03 pm
1459 views | 4 Recommendations | 32 comments
Photos
John Tyner Will Not Face TSA Fine For Refusing Body Scan and Pat-down: Says Transportation Security Administration Chief John Pistole
The head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), John Pistole says John Tyner will not be fined for refusing to submit to a pat-down at San Diego Airport.
- John Tyner Refuses TSA Pat-down
- TSA Screenings, Blame Big Sis?
- Body Scans Images leaked
- TSA Pat-down Of Screaming Child, Video
John Pistole made the comments while defending TSA policies during a Senate hearing originally scheduled to be about air cargo security but instead turned into a discussion of body scanners, and what some call overly aggressive pat-downs of airline passengers.
"I do not anticipate anything coming from that," Pistole said when asked about Tyner.
John Tyner is the San Diego resident who refused to go through a body scanner and who told an airport official who was about to do a pat-down.
"If you touch my junk I will have you arrested,"
After refusing the pat-down John Tyner was able to secure a refund for his airplane ticket.
The threat of the TSA fine occurred after John Tyner secured his ticket re-fund from American Airlines and was attempting to leave SAN airport when one official apparently told Tyner that he is facing a TSA fine of $10,000 dollars and a possible civil suit
Advertisement
NowPublic on Facebook
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most Recommended Comment
Nathan Owens (not verified)
Crowd Power
NowPublic Staff
Vancouver, Canada
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (32)
at 13:44 on November 17th, 2010
He deserves the fine. He is lucky he was able to get a refund for his ticket, many people would have told him it was his own fault, and he was out of luck.
at 15:59 on November 17th, 2010
Are you kidding me? He deserves the fine for what? They told him: You can (a) go through the scanner (b) get an invasive (offensive and deeming) pat down or (c) leave the airport. They never said "If you choose c we will fine you." He is an American hero who stood up for his rights and I applaud him. The government cannot and should not do whatever they want which is why we have checks and balances to keep these things in line. The TSA for whatever reason has chosen to ignore those checks and it is starting to catch up with them. I say good for John Tyner and everyone else who stands with him! I know I won't be flying or subjecting my family to this type of gate rape anytime soon until the TSA changes their tune.
at 08:15 on November 18th, 2010
He was trying to bully security, threatening legal action for them doing their legally required job; and he was causing undue delay for others, while security had to deal with his little fit. That is why he deserves the fine. I believe the level of the fine is excessive, but to play a game like his, and have no consequenses? No one made him decide to fly. The rules are there for the safety of everyone, and everyone is expected to follow them. If you are not interested in going through the screening, that is fine, take a bus, drive, walk. But if you make a concious decision to fly, and you know that these requirements are in place, you have no justification to cause a scene once you are there. If there is a problem with the screening, bring it up with your government. Do not go and cause an incident at airport security, distracting them from looking for people who are an actual threat. By acting the way he did, he made himself look like he had something to hide, from the perspective of the security staff.
at 18:07 on December 1st, 2010
I like this idea that solves you guys bickering issues: Two flight options. One where security is tight via scanners/groping and one with much less invasive security. If you want you "liberties" and "freedoms" take the less invasive option and if you want tighter security take that option. I wonder which of you freedom fighters would take the lighter security option flights? I think I know which one would be the flight of choice for the terrorists. I seriously would like to know, is this a reasonable solution for guys? Because many of us want these security measures (something like 70% I think) but I would be ok letting people choose a less-security flight.
at 21:29 on November 17th, 2010
You're a tool. Just another American sheep. Do you even have a brain to think on your own, or do you just do everything you're told. I bet my life that you live in the south and probably haven't graduated from high school.People like you make me sick. Stand up for yourself. Or do you need the government to do that for you?RON PAUL 2012www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwsdq69AHnw
at 08:05 on November 18th, 2010
First off, I am not an american. Second, I am more than capable of standing up for myself, and I can do so in an intelligent manner, throwing a hissy fit and insulting my intelligeance is not going to work on me. Third, would you rather be checked by security, or die because that, for fear of being offensive, no one was checked prior to boarding and someone brought an explossive device onto the plane? It is about picking the lesser of two evils, the back of a hand run up the inside of your leg, or a bomb on the plane you are in... I know what I would chose, but then, maybe I just have more of a conception about how permanent death is than you.
at 09:37 on November 18th, 2010
I'm not worried about people being offensive. I'm worried about those so called people doing their legally obligated jobs (a) trampling on my civil rights, and (b) giving me a search that would other wise be considered sexual assault. I can tell you are not an American because it appears you have no concept of civil liberties or the idea that "those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
at 11:03 on November 18th, 2010
Well said, Combat Veteran. This poster's stance is ridiculous. If I'm not wrong, but Americans still have free speech. John Tyner was just expressing his feelings and his course of action if the officials did something inappropriate. He has the right to do that and should not be fined for doing so. Also, he did not physically threaten the official which I can see might be grounds for some action.And when I heard it was 10,000 dollars, I almost laughed out loud. You are fining him for no reason. John Tyner is a lucky and smart man that he recorded the exchange because if not, I'm sure that this whole situation would be looking alot different now.And if you are not American nor studied American policies and laws, then not to be rude, you really don't have any say on whether John broke the law or not and if he should be fined. Thankyou.
at 06:24 on November 19th, 2010
" I can tell you are not an American because it appears you have no concept of civil liberties"
So only Americans can possibly understand the concept of civil liberties? Is that what you are claiming?
at 13:15 on November 22nd, 2010
Firstly, it is not considered sexual assault as generally people consent to it. Had the TSA proceeded to pat him down despite his protests then in that case it would be considered sexual assault. There are many other methods of travel, he could drive, take the train or the bus; plane is not his only option, he is not forced to use it, and since going through the scanner or being patted down is required if you are to travel by plane, if he wants to go on the plane, he should be prepared to be be patted down. However, I do believe that he should have the right to leave the procedure at any time without having to face a fine at all, never mind being so ridiculously high as $10 000
at 09:09 on November 19th, 2010
Anyone that thinks what the tsa is doing right now must be working for the tsa. I am getting ready to fly California to be with my family for a couple of weeks and I am trembling because I am so nervous about being humiliated by the tsa. All the stuff I’m hearing scares me. I don’t want to be treated like a criminal. I’m a law abiding citizen. I don’t want to be subjected to the radiation of the body scan and I certainly don’t want someone touching my body. I don’t even like going to the doctor. If someone touches me inappropriately I will slap them, then what will happen to me? What should I do?
at 17:35 on November 17th, 2010
@Piobar: I did not give six years of my life to the US military to see normal civilians routinely groped by "security" personnel at US airports. You can kiss my American ass.
at 08:17 on November 18th, 2010
I dare say you gave six years of your life in return for pay. Or did you have a special contract in the military which involved no financial reward but the right to decide on security policies at airports?
at 22:10 on November 18th, 2010
Just when I thought there was no bigger idiot online than Piobar, FaithlessTemplar shows up!
at 22:41 on November 18th, 2010
Though strangely you fail to offer any counter arguments to the "idiots" and are reduced to using insults instead. That says a great deal about you.
at 08:21 on November 18th, 2010
I respect the service you did for your country. But as a result, you of all people should be aware of A) the fact that the most common places to hide weapons among men is in the crotch of their pants, B) a security pat-down is not the same as groping; at least it should not be, and if it is, that is the security guard doing something wrong, and C) the threat to your country is real, and does not always strike from outside. I am sure everyone agrees that it is unfortunate that such measures are necessary; but wishing away a threat does not keep you safe.
at 06:17 on November 19th, 2010
@Piobar: You're right that a threat to our country is real. The threat to our country is from the federal government and sheeple like you that think it's OK for the state to violate the liberties of its citizens. People like you are the reason that this country has mutated into a police state."Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." - Ben Franklin
at 21:38 on November 17th, 2010
First intelligent thing from TSA in years.
at 11:48 on November 18th, 2010
he-won't-get-fined... they'll-just-torture-him-with-military-weapons-and-gangstalk-him-every-day. See-Vic-Livingston's-posts-for-a-preview.
at 22:59 on November 18th, 2010
Oh yes right that's what they want us to think "we'll die" if we don't submit to their abuse of our 4th amendment.
1- I don't want to be exposed to their scanners radiation.
Why do the Feds in the US see fit to keep the image scans of those the TSA deemed safe to fly, do you have a reasonable answer for that too?
2- Nor will I stand in line waiting for my gyn airport exam and proctologists finger, for the place where the sun don't sun a "terrorists" stow away place.
No, not fine, his name will go on the "non sheep list"
at 06:44 on November 19th, 2010
The entire TSA needs to be patted down, strip-searched, and then kicked in its collective ass. The agency is more concerned with being politically correct than it is with protecting Americans from terrorists. The agency is simply another vehicle used by the federal government--especially the current federal government--to condition Americans into accepting a Marxist police state. My solution to the problem is simply this: Make it legal for law abiding Americans to carry their weapons with them whenever they fly and if some Middle-Eastern terrorist type or some mentally ill Caucasion or African-American convert to Jihadism starts acting up, just whack the SOB on the plane. Make sure you use JHP ammo, though, and not FMJ . . .you wouldn't want the bullet to go through the terrorist and pierce the skin of the plane. After a few of the mutts get whacked, they'll get the message and try something new. It is an absolute outrage that American citizens are being subjected to this crap because their government refuses to treat terrorists the way the terrorists deserve to be treated. Have a nice day! :)
at 08:03 on November 19th, 2010
Had he been Muslim, or of a Middle Eastern background, would he receive anywhere near this level of support? Or, if he HAD been a terrorist, and taken a plane down over US airspace, would anyone have supported the security who "respected his fourth ammendment right" or would they be howling for blood. I agree that a $10,000 fine is excessive. But a fine for creating a public disturbance would be justified.
To those who feel I am blindly following your government in accepting a loss of freedom in exchange for a false sense of safety, go walk down the streets of Panjwaii, or Tehran, waving a US flag, then come back and tell me that America does not face a threat. America is a democratic republic; in other words, you, the people, chose your government. If they are not acting in a manner that you see fit, petition them to have the laws changed. Do not just pick and chose which laws you would like to follow. That would be Anarchy, and lead to a Hobbsian "State of Nature." To those who do not know what that is, it is war of everyone against everyone, over everything.
And to Rory, I say again, everything is not a Communist conspiracy. You are living in the past, it is not 1955 anymore. Communism failed, there is no Soviet Union. Not everyone who has an opinion different to yours is a Socialist, a Marxist, a pinko, or what ever other term you want to use. But it amazes me how much time you find to write these diatrabes, when there are so many crosses out there waiting for you to burn them. Dont forget your pointy white hat!
at 12:12 on November 19th, 2010
Piobar: Stop applying stereotypes to myself and those that you disagree with. You're all wet. You're the one that continuously labels people here that don't agree with your own Marxist ideology. You're not really as bright as you'd like others to believe. I just hope that others catch on and call you a little more often on your BS. And have a nice day. :)
at 13:42 on November 19th, 2010
Rory, considering you are the one who refered to "Middle Easter terrorist types" and "African American Jihadists" and spoke of shooting "mutts" most would agree that you are the last person who can justifiably accuse anyone of throwing around stereotypes. I have no Marxist ideology. I will again, for what is probably the hundredth time, explain to you that I am not a communist. I am not now, nor have I ever been a member of the communist party. I am what you might call an equal opportunity ass-hole. Clearly, based on your two little attempts to attack my credibility, rather than my stance, I have touched a nerve. So be it, I still hope you enjoy your weeked, and no one drops an airplane on your head. If nothing else, you amuse me through your repetitive, anti-communist rhetoric. Its like taking a trip back in time to the McCarthy era.
at 12:33 on November 19th, 2010
Piobar: By the way: Is that your real name? What is it . . . Piobare Piobar or just Piobar? In other words one name for your first and last? How convenient and minimalist! It's all too unfortunate and common in the world of the internet that people post under assumed names. And the reason why they do that is because they're afraid and/or have something to hide and they can spout off all sorts of unsubstantiated crap and not be held accountable. What are you afraid of and what do you have to hide up there in Canada? If you want people to take you seriously and you truly want to engage in an open and honest dialogue then you need to come out of your shadows and post your true identity along with a recent head shot of yourself. If not, then I and others will assume that you're just another anonymous blogger and like all anonymous bloggers, what you have to say is just a bunch of crap. You really need to try something new. Again: Have a nice day . . . .
at 20:37 on November 19th, 2010
Rory, you are totally out of line on this one, you bang on about how everyone should strap on a .44 before getting on a plane so they can blast some raghead terrorist, then accuse someone who disagreed with you of being a commie before ironically accusing him of labelling people as stereotypes.
Did you even once read what you had written? I too write under a handle, unsurprisingly 'faithlesstemplar' was not the name given to me when I was born.
Are you saying that only people who use photos of themselves and their real names are capable of making valid points? That is a ludicrous suggestion. How would you even know if the name and photo were real?
Your claim is that of a desperate man whose laughable attempt at argument has failed and is now forced to randomly grasp at any difference between yourself and the person you are arguing with.
at 04:35 on November 20th, 2010
Faithless Templar: You and Piobar are the ones that need to read what you both write. And you both need to engage in much self-editing. Both of you haven't presented one argument here that has any bearing on my initial comment. Piobar simply used my comment as an opportunity to attack me personally.
Like Piobar, you don't have the courage to reveal your true identity. In other words, you're just another anonymous blogger. And people are supposed to take someone such as yourself or Piobar seriously when you two can't even state your true identity? What are you afraid of? If you're going to be that way, then both of you should stick to anonymous blogging which amounts to nothing more than BS.
Let's get one thing straight Templar: I didn't start off personally attacking the person that posted the story nor did I initially attack anyone that commented on the story. I simply posted a comment to the story here. But almost immediately after I posted my comment, Piobar saw fit to attack me personally. And that's one of the traits of a Marxist. Attack the messenger and not the message. And indeed he did attack me personally. Here's one of the things that Piobar said about me: "But it amazes me how much time you find to write these diatrabes, when there are so many crosses out there waiting for you to burn them. Dont forget your pointy white hat!"
It only takes me about two minutes to write a "diatribe". HA! Why did Piobar say that? Does he have some inside knowledge that I'm a Klansman? If he does, then he needs to take off his disguise, reveal his true identity, and post a full head shot of himself here on NP above his bio before he throws out accusations like that about me or anyone else that he doesn't agree with on a public site. You need to do the same, Templar. If you both want to start personally attacking people right off the bat, because you simply don't agree with their point of view, then you need to back it up with facts.
There is something very curious about you, Templar, and Piobar in that you have such a strong emotional and adverse reaction to one such as myself who has a difference of opinion and who denounces Middle Eastern terrorists and associates terrorism with Muslims, Islamists, etc. Indeed you both go into an emotional frenzy whenever anyone associates terrorists with Muslims. I think that both of you are in need of a check up from the neck up. In other words, both of you have some emotional issues as well as extremely fragile egos and very thin skins because you obviously can't tolerate someone that has an opposing point of view and as a result, you have to engage in personal attacks.
The facts are, whether you like it or not, that virtually all terrorist activity that goes on throughout the world is carried out by Muslims in the name of Allah and their religion. And there is no evidence to suggest that the terrorist activity is confined to only a tiny handful of the Muslim population and that the terrorist activity is not dominated by a quest for religious and perhaps ethnic purity. If you two anonymous bloggers are ever unlucky enough to find yourself at the mercy of some crazed Islamic Jihadist, I wish you lots of luck. LOL!
One final thought: Before narrow-minded and intolerant ignoramuses like you and Piobar polluted this NP site, we were able to post our thoughts, opinions, beliefs, and differences of opinion here without being attacked personally for our views. Apparently the quality of "contributors" to this site has diminished. That's a shame . . . .
at 07:13 on November 20th, 2010
I feel your pain man :)
at 05:33 on November 20th, 2010
I do not recall even once mentioning muslims, so why did you bring them into the argument?
Do you really believe that anybody who does not share your views is emotionally fragile and in need of a psychiatric evaluation? If so then why do you shriek about intolerance and bigotry and claim we are trying to censor your view? If we have such large egos then why do we use tags instead of real names?
I think you will find that I did indeed include some arguments from your posts, the fact you overlooked them is hardly my fault, is it?
I also find your idea of personal attacks to be 'marxist' to be quite frankly, laughable, I will allow you to retract it without further comment.
I did not go into an 'emotional frenzy' as you claim, it is in fact you who has strong adverse reactions to opposing views.
And again I ask about the logic of your 'only people using real names and photo's can be counted as contributions. Why? The comments are still applicable irrespective of who posts them, for someone who seems to be against "personal attacks" you seem awfully keen on making this a personal issue.
If your comments are an example of the 'good old days' of NP then I am sure a change is to be welcomed.
at 04:42 on November 22nd, 2010
Congrats Tyner!!! No fine is a good thing and you are a modern age hero--standing up for your beliefs in the face punishment is not an easy thing to do! The government shouldn't (and really, doesn't) have the right to give people the choice between possible cancer from radiation or being raped by someone wearing the same gloves they've used to rape countless others. Alright, maybe there are worse sources of radiation that we go through but I've seen no scientific evidence to back that up. As for my use of the word "rape", to touch someone in private places where that someone doesn't want to be touched is rape--especially when other people have been touched with those same gloves in the same areas. I mean think about it, if multiple people opt out of the scanner and the first one has an STD and those gloves touch bodily fluids--which is a definite possiblity--then everyone in the following checks has now been exposed to that same STD. The TSA is wrong to be doing this and needs to find a better way before more people like Tyner show up.