The Phil Mocek Incident

[gonzalu]

Not sure if this has been posted. Very interesting case... comments? Watch the videos, they are very interesting indeed.

http://papersplease.org/wp/mocek/





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pc5DBUK1K8M

Interview after trial.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MjkLjNIUKs&amp

[Zee71]

Interesting out come. Here's some additional info from the TSA website: http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/taking_pictures.shtm

[NIKV69]

More from the crowd that doesn't want to show ID and doesn't want to be questioned or searched. I don't think the the TSA is always the greatest but right now they need to be listened to. It's a shame that somebody's tax money will be needed to pay this idiot when he wins his civil suit.

[PhilDernerJr]

Reading the beginning of the site, I don't know where in the Constitution is says one has a right to travel.

I can't stand when people defy just for the sake of defying. He's only doing for the purpose of being an ass. If he had a school project or something, at least there would be a reason for what he's doing.

He's lucky he's in the US and the courts decided to not send him to jail. He should be grateful that he is where he is, instead of acting like he's some sort of victim.

[gonzalu]

I agree with both you Nick and Phil, but there is also a need for folks to test our laws. Giving the governemnt the freedom to do as it pleases without regard for the law is also not good. So I agree that I would not be taking pictures of TSA or checkpoints for any reason because I just don;t need to, but they also can't do a thing about if one of the citizens which has the right to, does.

Phil, that's like our problem where others don;t see the need for us to take pictures of planes just because they feel we are idiots or jerks who don;t need to. Not exactly the same but similar. Maybe he has a fetish to take pictures of government in action? Who am I to judge?

Nick, you CAN'T say what you said... YOU don;t make the rules... so if it is legal and someone wants to do it, it is as much their right as you wanting to do what you like to...

This is tough... you can feel what you want but also must defend their right to do as they please as long as it is legal... Ethics is a different story. You can argue ethics all you like but you have no right to argue that someone's rights were violated and they do not have the right to sue.

You can also say why didn;t the TSA just leave the guy alone? If he took his pictures, and presented his boarding pass and no law says he has anything else to prove, leave him the heck alone... no cops would have gotten in trouble and no TSA ruffling, and no courts time and no law suits from Joe Plumber and no one gets hurt... never have been from any pictures.

YOU KNOW the TSA guy got upset because he felt he was a cop or someone with power and was not happy that someone challenged him.

Phil, I also was very doubtful about the no ID requirement. I have first hand knowledge of NY State law on personal identification. If a Police Officer asks you for ID in NYS and you can;t produce one, you can be DETAINED (not arrested yet) until such time as your identity can be established. In the event that you cannot prove you are a legal citizen or resident, you can be arrested. I never had to test it in my previous life but and I don;t remember what could happen to you should you be unidentifiable via fingerprinting or other methods. I believe the feds get involved then.

[PhilDernerJr]

I'd like to announce that Phil Mocek has joined the site and will be taking part in the discussion. Many of us have strong feelings about this (myself included) but I want to urge everyone to follow our rules and keep the discussion friendly in all directions.

Thanks guys.

[NIKV69]

Look, we are in a world where if you don't want to be screened before you board fine. Eventually a plane will come down. Either in a populated area or not. On the other hand if you want the best shot at making sure everyone that gets on planes doesn't have a weapon it's the TSA. They are far from perfect but they are the only thing between us and terrorism.

You can slag then all you want, say you don't want to be patted down, don't want to be bombarded with radiation, say you don't want to profile etc, but at the end of the day none of you that do will want to deal with situation when people die.

You seriously want me to believe you would sacrifice people's lives for liberty? Not to get patted down? Or go through the extra screening after you decided you don't want to bring ID? Then give us this 'papers please' propaganda?


I doubt it.

I have nothing to say to Phil Mocek. To be honest I think it's pretty clear he orchestrated his encounter with the TSA and local law enforcement and much like Sen Paul are getting in the way of people trying to do an impossible job to try to keep people as safe as possible.

Is is that hard to bring ID with you? Or in Sen Paul's case get a pat down? I am sick of this wannabe libertarian garbage because I am more libertarian than anyone. I want all drugs legal, I want prostitution legal and well as polygamy too. I am not stupid enough to think we can survive without any taxes or being patted down or made to show ID at the airport. Unless someone has a better idea of screening pax without having fares go through the roof I want to hear it. Right now the TSA has done a decent job of keeping people from dying so until that time it's the law of the land.

Bring your ID and leave your attitude home. You're not the only one at the airport. I am sick of hearing the TSA sucks. They have bad apples like everyone.

As stated I have nothing to say to Mr. Mocek because he is an imposter. You want real libertarianism? Then elect Ron Paul. Have him disband the IRS, EPA, TSA and everything else he says he wants to. Then bring our whole military home. Just make sure you are all there when it all goes to hell. Which would happen in a matter of months.

Though a better way to handle it is to suck it up, leave your attitude home and bring proper ID with you. Comply with the TSA's wishes. Everyone gets on the plane and everyone arrives safely.

Just a thought.

[Gerard]

Though a better way to handle it is to suck it up, leave your attitude home and bring proper ID with you. Comply with the TSA's wishes. Everyone gets on the plane and everyone arrives safely.
Just a thought.

My thought(s) also. Good post there.

[jerslice]

I always thought we were a give me liberty or give me death type society...

Anyways personally not bringing ID does sound to be intentional baiting that goes too far(i dont see anything unreasonable about requiring ID) but I have no problem with people who question and stand up to the tsa's search and seizure powers which are to me--if you didn't already guess--ridiculously overbroad and terribly intrusive if not flat unconstitutional. (We should not have to submit to the same basic procedure as someone who is frisked under reasonable suspicion.).

Phil, though there is no explicit right to travel, I find the implication you've made alarming. If I follow that to its logical conclusion you have basically argued that the government has the right to restrict our freedom of movement or potentially bar or functionally bar entire modes of transportation from someone, despite their being a law abiding citizen on whatever basis they so choose. Then again the bill of rights says there is to be no unreasonable search and seizure but here we have to choose between government violating our privacy or our person in order to access one of the most efficient modes of transportation on the planet - so I guess it's all fair game.
Additionally, I have a mixed reaction to your comment that he should be grateful he lives in a place where he can pull **** like this and walk away. On the one hand, I agree that he should be thankful he lives in a place where he has the ability to meaningfully challenge a law and not automatically spend a decade in hard labor, I suspect he is. But on the other I strongly oppose the implication that we should just suck it up, smile, and move on instead of challenging the system when we feel a violation against our rights has been committed.

[NIKV69]

(We should not have to submit to the same basic procedure as someone who is frisked under reasonable suspicion.).

You're not. Reasonable suspicion usually means you have been pulled over for some other offense or detained for some other reason by law enforcement going about your daily life and not entering an aircraft where a hundred other people's safety comes into play.


I strongly oppose the implication that we should just suck it up, smile, and move on instead of challenging the system when we feel a violation against our rights has been committed.

So again you are for letting people die so your liberty can remain intact? Remember this whole liberty thing was drafted long before the Taliban or Al Qaida was even a thought. Sure I am a liberty guy too but to hold the constitution up is fine. You going to be the one to knock on Helen Tobin's door and tell her that her son is laying in a field in Lockerbie?

This is 2012, I think our goal should be to keep air travel as safe as possible not pander to Ron Paul and his son.

Which brings me to something I find funny.

Senator Paul was being interviewed and he went in to this tirade how the TSA is doing random checks and pat downs and how unconstitutional that is. Then in the next sentence went into how it would be better to profile people to pat down. So in essence an Arab-American can have his constitutional rights trampled but an Arian from KY should be allowed to just board?

Something is very wrong with that picture.

Again the TSA is far from perfect but at the moment it's all we got. Do what they tell you or call Greyhound.

[mirrodie]

Agree w nick and Gerard. Carry the ID and move along. Test the system on your own time. Bust balls only when provoked.

[gonzalu]

Look, we are in a world where if you don't want to be screened before you board fine. Eventually a plane will come down. Either in a populated area or not. On the other hand if you want the best shot at making sure everyone that gets on planes doesn't have a weapon it's the TSA. They are far from perfect but they are the only thing between us and terrorism.

Where did I say any of the above? Did I say that Nick? Really? Why do you want to spin this into what is not? You love to just add fuel and light it don't you? LOL Seriously man, no one is going that far. Let's get back to the subject at hand. ID and Photos... THAT'S IT!!! Where did bringing down planes come into the picture here? Where did busting balls come in to terrorism? In some states, you are not required by law to wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle. I think it is stupid and dumb, yet I can't do a damn thing about it when I see someone riding down the interstate without a helmet.



You can slag then all you want, say you don't want to be patted down, don't want to be bombarded with radiation, say you don't want to profile etc, but at the end of the day none of you that do will want to deal with situation when people die.


Again, why are you going WAY OUTSIDE the discussion envelope here? For your own gain so you have a platform to dish out your personal and political views? Your views are ok with me and I respect them, but stick to the subject and the point!
What weapon did he have? What intent? He was clear he was NOT going to prevent them from doing their job. He never said do not frisk me, pat me, radiate me, etc. Not that I heard...



You seriously want me to believe you would sacrifice people's lives for liberty? Not to get patted down? Or go through the extra screening after you decided you don't want to bring ID? Then give us this 'papers please' propaganda?


Again, where did I say this? How is this comment relevant? I don't believe anyone said anything about preventing TSA from doing their job or being processed etc. NOTHING to that effect. Show me where I or anyone did? Papers Please simply is one avenue for folks of that nature to speak out. There are other ways like standing in my way at the Subway Entrance and handing me a piece of paper... no different. Their right too... just like you have the right to let off some smoke in here... different?



I have nothing to say to Phil Mocek. To be honest I think it's pretty clear he orchestrated his encounter with the TSA and local law enforcement and much like Sen Paul are getting in the way of people trying to do an impossible job to try to keep people as safe as possible.


Again, I do NOT think this had anything to do with Security! At no point did I notice a security breach attempt, did you? If the law and the regulations say a boarding pass is an ID, so be it. Change the law then, Nick.



Is is that hard to bring ID with you? Or in Sen Paul's case get a pat down? I am sick of this wannabe libertarian garbage because I am more libertarian than anyone. I want all drugs legal, I want prostitution legal and well as polygamy too. I am not stupid enough to think we can survive without any taxes or being patted down or made to show ID at the airport. Unless someone has a better idea of screening pax without having fares go through the roof I want to hear it. Right now the TSA has done a decent job of keeping people from dying so until that time it's the law of the land.


Then get the law changed. I know photojournalists that have seen and photographed someone get shot in the head and killed. They had the opportunity to stand in front of the bullet, talk to the killer, whatever. Instead they just took pictures and did their job of recording. Morally, Ethically, Legally, whatever: Right? Wrong? Legal? Illegal? Not too easy to say ... Legally speaking, should the reporter be arrested? For what?



Bring your ID and leave your attitude home. You're not the only one at the airport. I am sick of hearing the TSA sucks. They have bad apples like everyone.


I do, he did not. Rules apparently say he does not have to. And btw, the whole thing started because of the insensitive TSA that does not want to have his pic taken and is apparently unaware of the law, rules, etc. The one person in the video that seems to be the most professional is the Police Officer!



As stated I have nothing to say to Mr. Mocek because he is an imposter. You want real libertarianism? Then elect Ron Paul. Have him disband the IRS, EPA, TSA and everything else he says he wants to. Then bring our whole military home. Just make sure you are all there when it all goes to hell. Which would happen in a matter of months.

Though a better way to handle it is to suck it up, leave your attitude home and bring proper ID with you. Comply with the TSA's wishes. Everyone gets on the plane and everyone arrives safely.

Just a thought.

Nick, you are an extremist! Don;t forget I love you... :cool: but you sometimes make mountains out of molehills, You are VERY MUCH LIKE Mr. Mocek in that you want to be heard, you want to flaunt your right to an opinion... regardless of what other's opinions might be!

[PhilDernerJr]

I always thought we were a give me liberty or give me death type society...

Anyways personally not bringing ID does sound to be intentional baiting that goes too far(i dont see anything unreasonable about requiring ID) but I have no problem with people who question and stand up to the tsa's search and seizure powers which are to me--if you didn't already guess--ridiculously overbroad and terribly intrusive if not flat unconstitutional. (We should not have to submit to the same basic procedure as someone who is frisked under reasonable suspicion.).

Phil, though there is no explicit right to travel, I find the implication you've made alarming. If I follow that to its logical conclusion you have basically argued that the government has the right to restrict our freedom of movement or potentially bar or functionally bar entire modes of transportation from someone, despite their being a law abiding citizen on whatever basis they so choose. Then again the bill of rights says there is to be no unreasonable search and seizure but here we have to choose between government violating our privacy or our person in order to access one of the most efficient modes of transportation on the planet - so I guess it's all fair game.
Additionally, I have a mixed reaction to your comment that he should be grateful he lives in a place where he can pull **** like this and walk away. On the one hand, I agree that he should be thankful he lives in a place where he has the ability to meaningfully challenge a law and not automatically spend a decade in hard labor, I suspect he is. But on the other I strongly oppose the implication that we should just suck it up, smile, and move on instead of challenging the system when we feel a violation against our rights has been committed.

Usually in the topics where I say "flying is not a right" we are discussing the way airline treat people. I say that because flying is a business. I say it's not a right because it's not in the Constitution...simple as that. If you don't want to adhere to the requirements of flying, then you have other options.

Many people shoot back at me the "those who sacrifice their liberty for safety deserve neither" quote, but I don't think it applies. I just don't think showing my ID, letting others know that I am one of the good guys, is a sacrifice of my liberty. If I don't like the process, I have a right to complain to the organization and politicians and vote and so forth. THAT is the liberty.

The fact that Mr. Mocek wasn't grabbed by his throat, hauled away and never heard from again, and instead was able to do all of this, have a trial and reach out to the masses shows just how much freedom he has in this nation, versus many other places in the world. Perhaps he should go try to change the process and policies there instead.

[megatop412]

'Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should' is what I follow, but I do think that there do need to be 'tests' of the system like this to see just how much freedom we have on paper vs. in reality.

That being said, I would ask to leave a plane if I found out someone had just boarded that was allowed onboard without having to show their ID. I would not have the same reaction if I saw a person filming the TSA staff, but the ID thing really bothers me, even if one is carrying a ticket- anybody could be carrying your ticket and claim to be you.

Mr. Mocek, if you are reading this, I am reminded of the suitcase containing the bomb that was allowed onboard Air India 182 in the 80's. Over 300 people were killed because the gate agent ignored a security policy that would have prevented the bag from being interlined from a previous flight, all because the person who checked the bag in insisted on it. Had the agent enforced the rule, which was in place for a reason, there probably would have been a different outcome. So, yes, you should be required to carry ID if you intend to board a commercial aircraft so that your identity can be confirmed and so that no luggage is allowed on board that is not connected to anyone on the plane.

[NIKV69]

Manny I wasn't talking specifically about you but how people are putting their liberty over safety which is the underlying concept about encounters like Mocek and Sen Paul. I love you too but I will love you more if you stop the triple shot expresso at Starbucks!

[Gerard]

Agree w nick and Gerard. Carry the ID and move along. Test the system on your own time. Bust balls only when provoked.

Absolutely. Believe me my Irish doesnt allow me to suffer fools easily but I've had no problems the last few years including 3 trips to Europe. On my last
trip to Phoenix Iwas pulled over for a pat-down (JetBlue) and the TSA worker was a complete professional. Took a few minutes and I was on my way!

[gonzalu]

Manny I wasn't talking specifically about you but how people are putting their liberty over safety which is the underlying concept about encounters like Mocek and Sen Paul. I love you too but I will love you more if you stop the triple shot expresso at Starbucks!

No no no... that is my GOD GIVEN RIGHT to caffeinate as much as I possibly can :tongue:

Look bottom line is I love to DISCUSS ideas without feeling like others are imposing their way of life on me. As for the ID thing, while I do not mind it one bit, I actually never knew there was no regulation saying you must. Recently, Warren Buffet made a great statement about Mitt Romney and himself paying no more than 15% taxes while Warren's own secretary pays almost 34%. He said the LAW allows him to do that LEGALLY ... forget moral and ethics... we are a society governed by the rule of law. If you;re not happy with that, CHANGE the law... it is there for the changing .Why would anyone fault someone from paying the least taxes they have to? Would you pay 45% because you have a civic duty?

I believe it is a similar issue here. I do believe, however, the whole incident started when the filming started.

Nick, Phil, do you believe this incident would have gone differently had there been no witnesses and / or recording devices? Phil, you're absolutely correct, there is a lot more due process and less violent / unknown outcomes in the US. Partly because we are more civil and lately partly more due to greater exposure via cell phone cameras, security cameras and awareness. Not many years ago, someone would have been foceably removed by their throat and no one would have known it. That would be a shame...

[gonzalu]

Absolutely. Believe me my Irish doesnt allow me to suffer fools easily but I've had no problems the last few years including 3 trips to Europe. On my last
trip to Phoenix Iwas pulled over for a pat-down (JetBlue) and the TSA worker was a complete professional. Took a few minutes and I was on my way!

I don;t fly a lot but lately, every trip back from Dominican Republic ends up with me going to the Customs office and sitting there while an officer punches a few keys into a different computer and eventually lets me go... I really don;t care. I have nothing to hide.

Been through security lots of times, I take off my shoes, put the laptop down wherever they want, I walk when I am told, stop when I am told, go through the sniffer when I am told, never complain, sometimes missing a flight or connection due to the long lines at security checkpoints... have had to argue with TSA managers to get my money clip back (not the money, just the leather clip) etc. etc. ALWAYS extremely professional and I have never felt harassed, singled out etc. I have nothing but good things to say about TSA.

I still feel that if the rules say no ID is required, then so be it... I have the CHOICE to drive or not travel at all... No ID required on a Bus or Train/Subway... No ID required for me to drive a huge U-Haul truck to Manhattan from Albany and right through Times Square, Wall Street and The Village ... are we taking the airline industry too serious just because planes were used as weapons? Are we sure Gov't Issued ID is that secure? YEs I know that some deterrent is better than none... agreed, but some here make it seem like it is the ONE SURE bet defense...

Regardless of how we feel about it individually, no law was broken it seems as a jury felt that there wasn't and had everyone known the rules as they should, none of this would have happened and we would be discussing ways to come together and vote for the laws to be strengthened!

Btw, I don't appreciate that the TSA agents (JFK mostly) are not making eye contact with the public/travelers, speaking out loud and seemingly annoyed at the passengers, sometimes cursing, laughing out loud, holding up the process while they look at Facebook Photos on someone's phone (all real experiences by me, not anecdotal) etc. That will NOT make them seem as professional as they should/have to be. So far the most professional folks at the JFK complex (except for the airline staff itself) are the Customs Agents who so far have been absolutely professional.

[PhilDernerJr]

I think there are individuals in the position of authority who, at a time, might have abused their power and done something to the guy. But I don't think that someone doing that on an individual basis compares to what goes on in other countries, where it is almost their policy and method of enforcement. Social media and technology allow us to have a louder voice. Will politicians listen to us? I'm losing faith.

[PhilDernerJr]

I still feel that if the rules say no ID is required, then so be it... I have the CHOICE to drive or not travel at all... No ID required on a Bus or Train/Subway... No ID required for me to drive a huge U-Haul truck to Manhattan from Albany and right through Times Square, Wall Street and The Village ... are we taking the airline industry too serious just because planes were used as weapons? Are we sure Gov't Issued ID is that secure? YEs I know that some deterrent is better than none... agreed, but some here make it seem like it is the ONE SURE bet defense...

Aviation has a history of being used in terror much more than other modes here in the US, even before 9/11. Hijackings and such were almost commonplace for decades, and the additional threat because the palnes themselves are bombs that can come down anywhere is what makes it a true threat, and more so than a bus or train (though security needs to be tightened there as well).

[gonzalu]

Aviation has a history of being used in terror much more than other modes here in the US, even before 9/11. Hijackings and such were almost commonplace for decades, and the additional threat because the palnes themselves are bombs that can come down anywhere is what makes it a true threat, and more so than a bus or train (though security needs to be tightened there as well).

I disagree, I think Trains pose a far greater threat as missiles and their ability to enter deep into a city center regularly and easily... but now we are getting too involved in the how and ideas and I am not happy with that ... I'll just leave it at that :)

[NIKV69]

No no no... that is my GOD GIVEN RIGHT to caffeinate as much as I possibly can

We are going to put a pic of your face in every Starbucks with a sign. Do not serve this man!


Recently, Warren Buffet made a great statement about Mitt Romney and himself paying no more than 15% taxes while Warren's own secretary pays almost 34%. He said the LAW allows him to do that LEGALLY ... forget moral and ethics... we are a society governed by the rule of law. If you;re not happy with that, CHANGE the law... it is there for the changing .Why would anyone fault someone from paying the least taxes they have to? Would you pay 45% because you have a civic duty?

Romney paid 15% on money made from investments. Not income. Just because he was smart enough to make enough 20 years ago doesn't mean we need to tax him more. In fact he paid 3 million toward the fed how much did she pay? Trust me we are never going to tax people who invest more than what we do now. If we did they would invest in another country like Dubai that has no tax on the people who start business and hire.


Nick, Phil, do you believe this incident would have gone differently had there been no witnesses and / or recording devices?

Couldn't say but I know it would have been much different if he had brought his ID.


Btw, I don't appreciate that the TSA agents (JFK mostly) are not making eye contact with the public/travelers, speaking out loud and seemingly annoyed at the passengers, sometimes cursing, laughing out loud, holding up the process while they look at Facebook Photos on someone's phone (all real experiences by me, not anecdotal) etc. That will NOT make them seem as professional as they should/have to be. So far the most professional folks at the JFK complex (except for the airline staff itself) are the Customs Agents who so far have been absolutely professional.

We continue to talk about the TSA like it's a living being. It's an agency. Made up of a lot of people. Which means like anything else there will be good and bad. I am sure any attitude from agents can be from a number of things. Including the thousands of idiots who don't listen. Hold up lines, and make everyone pretty much pissed off for 8 hours. It has to be the most thankless job going.


Will politicians listen to us? I'm losing faith. About what exactly Phil? The fact that law enforcement and the TSA has agents that are badge heavy?




I disagree, I think Trains pose a far greater threat as missiles and their ability to enter deep into a city center regularly and easily... but now we are getting too involved in the how and ideas and I am not happy with that ... I'll just leave it at that :)

They do, subways especially. In fact I would hope NYPD is prepared because a germ type or anthrax type attack in the subway would be devastating. You really couldn't get the desired effect with a bomb but chemical wise you could. Not to mention there is really no way to screen people getting into the subway.

[emshighway]

It is good to see the common sense comments here.

As much as I would like to comment on this subject I do not wish to be pulled into something that may come back to haunt me especially since the subject of this thread may be participating.

These are my personal comments and are made as such and I am not representing the TSA in any way.

[pmocek]

Hi, all. Thank you for your interest in my case, and for the generally-civil tone of this thread. I'm completely comfortable discussing something about which other people disagree without taking any of it personally. I need to be just a bit careful about what I say, as there are still some legal matters to settle, but I'm happy to talk about anything that is already public information.

Before I get to specific responses, I'd like to clear up a few things about the right to air travel in the United States. Many people have been led to believe that it's a privilege, but that's not the case.

A commercial airline is not just a private business, it's a business which operates as a common carrier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier). If you pay the fare and follow its general rules, it is not allowed to deny you service.

The "public right of freedom of transit" by air is guaranteed by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_Deregulation_Act), and the TSA is required by Federal law (49 USC § 40101) to consider this right when it issues regulations. Freedom of movement is required in order for us to exercise our right to assemble, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Freedom of movement is also guaranteed by Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm#art12), a human rights treaty signed and ratified by the United States.

Federal law acknowledges our right to travel by air:

Quoting United States Code TITLE 49—TRANSPORTATION (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sup_01_49.html) > SUBTITLE VII—AVIATION PROGRAMS (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sup_01_49_10_VII.html) > PART A—AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sup_01_49_10_VII_20_A.html) > subpart i—general (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sup_01_49_10_VII_20_A_30_i.html) > CHAPTER 401—GENERAL PROVISIONS (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sup_01_49_10_VII_20_A_30_i_40_401.html) > § 40101. Policy (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sec_49_00040101----000-.html):


(c) General Safety Considerations. — In carrying out subpart III (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sup_01_49_10_VII_20_A_30_iii.html) of this part and those provisions of subpart IV (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sup_01_49_10_VII_20_A_30_iv.html) applicable in carrying out subpart III, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall consider the following matters:

(1) the requirements of national defense and commercial and general aviation.
(2) the public right of freedom of transit through the navigable airspace.

[pmocek]

I don't know where in the Constitution is says one has a right to travel.

In the United States, we operate under the belief that all people are born with certain rights. The U.S. Constitution doesn't define rights. The Bill of Rights limits the power of our federal government in such a manner that it is restricted from infringing upon people's rights.


I can't stand when people defy just for the sake of defying.

That does sound bothersome. However, if we all went along with unjust and/or unlawful orders, it might save us some time in the short run, but it would likely lose us some freedom in the long run.


He's only doing for the purpose of being an ass.

I don't do anything with the intention of being an ass.


He's lucky he's in the US and the courts decided to not send him to jail. He should be grateful that he is where he is, instead of acting like he's some sort of victim.

I'm grateful to live in a place that is -- at least on paper -- a nation of laws, not of men. I'm fortunate that the place where my rights were violated has a system in which the accused stands before a jury of his peers before being judged.

A jury of six people and one alternate listened intently through two days of trial, then deliberated for about an hour before acquitting me of each of the four charges leveled against me. Contrary to the the claims of Albuquerque Aviation Police Department Officer Robert F. "Bobby" Dilley, I did not trespass, I did not resist, obstruct or refuse to obey a lawful order of a law enforcement officer officer, I did not conceal my identity with intent to obstruct, intimidate, hinder or interrupt (I didn't conceal it at all, in fact), and I did not engage in disorderly conduct. The state's case was so weak that I presented no evidence and offered no testimony. State witnesses lied in their written reports and on the stand, and the jury saw through it.

[pmocek]

More from the crowd that doesn't want to show ID and doesn't want to be questioned or searched. I don't think the the TSA is always the greatest but right now they need to be listened to. It's a shame that somebody's tax money will be needed to pay this idiot when he wins his civil suit.

I firmly believe that we should not be required to request and receive permission from our government before traveling from one state to another.

TSA's identity checks serve two purposes: airline revenue protection (less than 20 years ago, you could resell a ticket you purchased if you decided not to fly; now they'll sell your seat a second time), and facilitation of a system of restricting people's movement by way of government black lists.

I think it's crazy to think that we have a list of people who are so dangerous that they should not be allowed to fly -- even after walking through a metal detector and having their belongings searched for dangerous items -- and that instead of sending the police to arrest them and put them in front of judges, we should wait around for them to show up at airports with valid documentation of their identities, then either hassle them before they board the flight, or turn them away and let them go about their non-interstate-traveling business.

[NIKV69]

That does sound bothersome. However, if we all went along with unjust and/or unlawful orders, it might save us some time in the short run, but it would likely lose us some freedom in the long run.

The sad thing about this whole sorry incident is it was born out of the agenda of not having to show ID. I was going to waste some more of my time and ask you if you really think that by rebelling against the TSA we are somehow going to head off some doomsday scenario where all of our rights are taking away but why bother.

I ask you. With all the fringe agenda aside how do you propose we can travel safely? Be specific in how you would search and prevent threats and how to keep everyone safe in the air. Including logistics at the airport. How pax are screened etc.

[pmocek]

I agree that I would not be taking pictures of TSA or checkpoints for any reason because I just don;t need to, but they also can't do a thing about if one of the citizens which has the right to, does.

Please note that months ahead of my flight, at the public suggestion of TSA's Curtis "Blogger Bob" Burns, I contacted 50 major U.S. airports to inquire about any local policies they might have which would restrict photography or videotaping in publicly-accessible areas of the airport. Among them was ABQ. I had written notice -- which was published to the Web for all the world to see on a popular forum for frequent fliers (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-issues/938543-pv-alert-can-i-take-photos-checkpoint-airport.html) -- from ABQ TSA staff, that no such prohibition existed.


I also was very doubtful about the no ID requirement.

That's not at all surprising. TSA deliberately mislead people about this non-requirement. Identifying yourself with printed documentation just gets you through security faster and with a less-thorough check. Please see "TSA's airline passenger identification policies" (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-issues/1122783-tsas-airline-passenger-identification-policies.html) for a concise description of what I've learned about it.


I have first hand knowledge of NY State law on personal identification. If a Police Officer asks you for ID in NYS and you can;t produce one, you can be DETAINED (not arrested yet) until such time as your identity can be established. In the event that you cannot prove you are a legal citizen or resident, you can be arrested.

I'm not specifically familiar with New York law, but I'm quite confident that there is no place in the United States where one is required to have proof of identity, much less to carry it with him and present it upon demand (though I think there is effectively such a requirement in Arizona if your skin is brown). The Flex Your Rights Foundation publish some great information about your rights and responsibilities during police encounters (http://flexyourrights.org/faq).

[NIKV69]

This made for some interesting reading.

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2011/01/phil_mocek_tsa_checkpoint_trial.php

Especially this part.


Mocek is being represented in court by
Nancy Hollander (http://www.fbdlaw.com/nh.html)
, a New Mexico defense attorney renowned for representing two Guantanamo Bay detainees


I also found this funny.


When police were summoned, Mocek refused to give his name and other personal information, and as a result he is referred to as "John Doe" in places in the reports. He was ordered to leave the airport and refused, after which he was arrested.


So in addition to purposely not bringing ID (you believe we never have to prove who we are) you don't feel we should tell anyone in law enforcement who we are.

So no need to bring ID, The TSA has no legal right to scan us or pat us down but we can climb on an aircraft and fly? Yet people wonder why most of the country thinks Ron Paul is insane.

[pmocek]

Look, we are in a world where if you don't want to be screened before you board fine.

I think by "screened" you meant "searched." TSA staff screen the flow of passengers through TSA's airport barricades by searching them, questioning them, and then either granting or denying them permission to proceed about their lawful business. TSA folks use lots of euphemisms to keep us from thinking about their intrusive and unconstitutional practices.


[TSA staff] are far from perfect but they are the only thing between us and terrorism.

I don't know you, of course, but it sounds as if you're being manipulated by fear. If there were mad bombers lurking around every corner hoping to kill large numbers of people, they would detonate their bombs in restaurants, in stadiums, in public parks, on busy street corners, or in the line of people waiting to have their shoes X-rayed and water bottles confiscated just outside of airport security. But those things aren't happening. I don't believe that all these would-be mass-murderers are insistent upon executing their devilish plans specifically on commercial aircraft.


I have nothing to say to Phil Mocek. To be honest I think it's pretty clear he orchestrated his encounter with the TSA and local law enforcement

What makes you say that? I was trying to get home from a conference. I ended up in jail for a day and a half because TSA staff lied about their own policies, then some police officers were bothered by my lawful and respectful behavior.


Is is that hard to bring ID with you?

No. It's very, very, easy to take it with you. Traveling without ID is hard. Being diverted to another line for extra searches is hard. Being threatened by people who can stop you from traveling, or by other people who carry guns and have the authority to lock you in a cage, while taking a principled stand when you could suck it up and voluntarily surrender your rights, is hard. Flexing your rights when you think you don't need them in hopes that they'll still be around when you do is hard.

[pmocek]

Anyways personally not bringing ID does sound to be intentional baiting that goes too far

Yikes. The TSA guy who lied about TSA photography policies -- Jonathon Breedon -- testified on the witness stand that people fly without ID all the time. They have a procedure for dealing with the situation, and it seems to begin with them completing a form based on your answers to your questions, then having you sign it. (That form -- the one this guy was going to present to me for signature, that had been sitting on the counter right there where anyone passing could see it -- was what he claimed he was concerned about me photographing. Ha!)


i dont see anything unreasonable about requiring ID

You're not alone. Many, many, people feel that way. Please see "What's wrong with showing ID?" (http://papersplease.org/id.html) by the Identity Project (http://papersplease.org/who.html) for a great view of why it's unreasonable, why we shouldn't allow it, and how it makes us all less safe.


I strongly oppose the implication that we should just suck it up, smile, and move on instead of challenging the system when we feel a violation against our rights has been committed.

I'm glad you feel that way, and I appreciate you publicly stating such.

[pmocek]

Nick, [Phil D.], do you believe this incident would have gone differently had there been no witnesses and / or recording devices?

If I hadn't used my camera to record my interaction with the security guards and police officers -- then undeleted the video after the police tried to erase it while I was in jail -- I almost certainly would have been convicted of things I did not do. Everyone I've spoken who is familiar with what happened agrees on that point. Officer Dilley was extremely slick, and a very skilled liar.

[pmocek]

I would ask to leave a plane if I found out someone had just boarded that was allowed onboard without having to show their ID.

Knowing someone's name (or rather, knowing what name was printed on that card that any college student can purchase to buy beer with), doesn't make him or her any less of a danger. I don't care if it's Osama Bin Laden's ghost sitting next to me if he's not carrying weapons or explosives.

[pmocek]

[Do] you really think that by rebelling against the TSA we are somehow going to head off some doomsday scenario where all of our rights are taking away[?]

I think that if police officers are held personally accountable for doing TSA's dirty work -- enforcing rules that are made up on the fly, that neither we nor the police are allowed to read, if they exist at all -- they may stop helping with TSA's increasingly-lawless behavior.


how do you propose we can travel safely?

Reinforce cockpit doors and teach passengers to fight back in the event of a hijacking attempt.

[gonzalu]

Phil I am neither on your side or against you. I do, however, believe strongly in protecting the rights others have even when they conflict with my own views or beliefs. I come from a place where there are few rights and one surely cannot express their views, even to close friends for fear that they themselves will turn you in. So I take my respect for the rights we have very seriously REGARDLESS of what I believe in or not. I am originally from Cuba and while I enjoyed a wonderful childhood, I also know from my family and from learning about my country from the outside, that it isn't as great as children are led to believe.

While I carry ID and readily produce such when asked and have no reason not to, if it is NOT required by law, why should I impose my views upon someone who does not? In this country, the way we IMPOSE our views is as a collective and then only upon consciously and actively convincing the majority to vote for and elect and pass and convince others to change the laws to allow for that to happen.

I can find many examples of things we take for granted everyday that if we were asked to change them without a law, many here would not be happy to comply with if asked just to do it [because] without a law requiring it. Let's take spotting ...


Q: If we were asked by an NYPD or NCPD or PANYNJPD Officer to only take pictures of airplanes from at least 5 miles away from the airport perimeter, would you comply each and every time?

[pmocek]

This made for some interesting reading.

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2011/01/phil_mocek_tsa_checkpoint_trial.php

Especially this part.


Mocek is being represented in court by
Nancy Hollander (http://www.fbdlaw.com/nh.html)
, a New Mexico defense attorney renowned for representing two Guantanamo Bay detainees


My lawyers, Molly Schmidt-Nowara and Nancy Hollander, did excellent work. I like them both a lot, and I enjoyed working with them. I still owe them nearly $20,000 of the $34,000 their services cost me. I'm not wealthy, and making those monthly payments is difficult, but I wouldn't change things if I could go back and do it again. Facing the potential for thousands of dollars of fines and months in jail, with a bunch of cops and federal agents who were willing to commit their lies to paper, I sought the best legal assistance I could. Good lawyers take difficult cases.


I also found this funny.


When police were summoned, Mocek refused to give his name and other personal information, and as a result he is referred to as "John Doe" in places in the reports. He was ordered to leave the airport and refused, after which he was arrested.


That's inaccurate. The only order I refused that day was TSA shift manager Gerald Romero's, and he had no authority to issue it. He told me to put my camera down. I said, "I'd prefer not to," and continued documenting what was happening.

[pmocek]

If we were asked by an NYPD or NCPD or PANYNJPD Officer to only take pictures of airplanes from at least 5 miles away from the airport perimeter, would you comply each and every time?

Not a chance. It's ridiculous that we're asked to refrain from photographing something that thousands of people can see, remember, take notes about, or photograph with their phones while it looks like they're talking on them.

Thanks for giving us your take on why it's important to stand up for our rights.

[NIKV69]

TSA folks use lots of euphemisms to keep us from thinking about their intrusive and unconstitutional practices.It's the law of the land. Don't like it? Then vote people in office that will let you just walk on a plane without being screened. Unfortunately Ron Paul is running dead last right now.
I don't know you, of course, but it sounds as if you're being manipulated by fear. If there were mad bombers lurking around every corner hoping to kill large numbers of people, they would detonate their bombs in restaurants, in stadiums, in public parks, on busy street corners, or in the line of people waiting to have their shoes X-rayed and water bottles confiscated just outside of airport security. But those things aren't happening. I don't believe that all these would-be mass-murderers are insistent upon executing their devilish plans specifically on commercial aircraftUnfortunately past history would prove you wrong.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reidhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Farouk_Abdulmutallabhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Times_Square_car_bombing_attempt
What makes you say that? I was trying to get home from a conference. I ended up in jail for a day and a half because TSA staff lied about their own policies, then some police officers were bothered by my lawful and respectful behavior.Oh come on, you orchestrated this whole incident. You weren't just trying to get home. You're an activist pushing an agenda. Not to mention aligning yourself with a terrorist sympathizer attorney doesn't help your cause either.I also don't call refusing to give your name to police respectable behavior. In fact you were looking for a fight with law enforcement and you got it.
No. It's very, very, easy to take it with you. Traveling without ID is hard. Being diverted to another line for extra searches is hard. Being threatened by people who can stop you from traveling, or by other people who carry guns and have the authority to lock you in a cage, while taking a principled stand when you could suck it up and voluntarily surrender your rights, is hard. Flexing your rights when you think you don't need them in hopes that they'll still be around when you do is hard.What I love is how you have totally ignored my questions about how to protect the flying public from the ever present danger that exists. Again you are involved with people who sympathize with people who want to kill us so your total disregard for flying safety is hardly a surprise. The government doesn't share this view and it is why we have the TSA. Again far from perfect but they are doing the job. People are getting to and fro alive. So they need to be listened to. You could have brought your ID and this would have never been an issue. Our rights aren't going anywhere. That is just propaganda and fearmongering. If anyone is scared it seems to be you.
Reinforce cockpit doors and teach passengers to fight back in the event of a hijacking attempt.Oh yea I can see it now, during the Flight Attendants safety demo before the flight they can give us a quick course in fighting a terrorist with a bomb in flight. Mr. Mocek activism is great but when it crosses the line into paranoia and insanity we all lose. I am sorry I wasted this time out of my life to try to have a normal conversation. I think your actions, affiliations and above comment shows this is impossible. Good luck in the future.

[pmocek]

It's the law of the land.

You've touched on a major part of the problem. As far as we can tell, most of TSA's policies are not based in law. They require us to follow rules we are not allowed to read. How can we ensure that we're in compliance if we're not allowed to read the rules? How can we know the rules are just and constitutional? How can we tell what's legally required of us and what some security guard like this Breedon guy jus


Unfortunately Ron Paul is running dead last right now.

While I don't agree with him on everything, I think I agree with Paul on a lot. I love that he finally has some influence in the Republican debates, bringing up issues that the party-line-toeing droids would otherwise never touch.




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

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Times_Square_car_bombing_attempt

Those are three examples. It's hardly indication that there are bogeymen hiding around every corner as the U.S. government would have us believe. I refuse to be manipulated by fear.


Oh come on, you orchestrated this whole incident. You weren't just trying to get home. You're an activist pushing an agenda. Not to mention aligning yourself with a terrorist sympathizer attorney doesn't help your cause either.

I did not orchestrate the incident. I went into that airport intending to board my flight after some of the hassle I'd experienced numerous times before. When Dilley and Wiggins marched me into the police office, I thought they'd fill out some paperwork and I'd be back in time to make my flight. I am an activist -- it's hard not to be these days if you have the luxury of working just one job and you pay attention to what's happening.

As for the "terrorist sympathizer" thing, Nancy wrote a great op-ed about that ("A Terrorist Lawyer, and Proud of It (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/opinion/24iht-edhollander.html)," by Nancy Hollander, New York Times, March 26, 2010). In it, she begins:


I am a criminal defense lawyer. Over the past 32 years I have defended people and institutions charged with a myriad of crimes in the United States and I have consulted on criminal cases in Europe.

When I defended someone charged with raping a baby, no one thought I might have raped my own. When I defended someone charged with murder, no one searched my closets for skeletons. When I defended someone charged with a drug crime, no one accused me of using narcotics.

And even when I defended those accused of espionage for attempting to sell America’s nuclear secrets, no one questioned my loyalty to my country.

No longer. Now that I am defending those accused of terrorism, some people assume that I have stepped over an imaginary line and become “soft on terrorism” or worse, that I support terrorism and am providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

So let me say it: I am a terrorist lawyer, if that means I am willing to defend those accused of terrorism. I am currently defending two men imprisoned in Guantánamo and I defend others accused of terrorism.

She concludes:


Every day political figures in the United States continue to use fear in an effort to convince Americans that danger lies in protecting the very freedoms, rights and principles we value.

Those who are shouting the loudest today to limit the rights and protections available to my clients include some who may find themselves on the other side of the law in the future.

Whom will they call should the day come when they are charged with crimes as a result of lying to get the United States into war in Iraq, or permitting prisoners to be tortured, or illegally wiretapping our citizenry?


I also don't call refusing to give your name to police respectable behavior.

As I wrote a few minutes ago: The only order I refused that day was from the shift manager guy who told me to put my camera down -- after the other guy lied about their policies, and after both of them tried to take the camera away from me. He had no authority to compel me to put it down. He had good reason to do so, though -- it would prevent other people from seeing the truth about what happened. Nobody asked my name until after I was in jail, and nobody ever demanded that I identify myself. The police repeatedly asked, then demanded, that I present a document that I did not have.


What I love is how you have totally ignored my questions about how to protect the flying public from the ever present danger that exists.

Sorry, but our posts must have crossed. If you scroll up, you'll see that I said we should reinforce cockpit doors and teach passengers to fight back in the event of hijacking attempts.


You could have brought your ID and this would have never been [a problem].

You're probably right about that. I don't claim to have taken the easy route.

[pmocek]

I hope I haven't come across as combative here. I broke some serious rules of netiquette by not lurking a while to get a feel for things before jumping into the discussion. I'm happy to chat more about this if anyone is interested. I'll check in tomorrow evening.

Here's a five-minute interview I did with Judge Napolitano on FOX Business' show, "Freedom Watch," a few days after my trial: http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4515889/phil-mocek-on-battling-the-tsa-/

And here's a much more thorough interview I did for the Fully Informed Jury Association a few months later:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnNa6MK46es

[gonzalu]

Phil, as you state in your video above, you wanted a jury of your peers to see the evidence and find you not guilty for reasons of you believing you were within your rights. If the jury had not found in your favor, how would you have felt? How would you have reacted? Would your life or views have changed as a result? I ask because it sounds from your tone and demeanor that you are genuinely interested in what's right and wrong. I have always shown a great personality trait of right and wrong and a sense of righteousness. I also strongly believe that if I am wrong, I will and would accept it and learn any lessons, pay any burden and move on. I would love to hear your opinion if the decision by the jury had been for the plaintiffs?

Thank you for taking the time to openly discuss this case as well as your beliefs with us. I do not believe we owe you nor you us anything so it is in the interest of free and open discussion that I ask.

[megatop412]

Knowing someone's name (or rather, knowing what name was printed on that card that any college student can purchase to buy beer with), doesn't make him or her any less of a danger. I don't care if it's Osama Bin Laden's ghost sitting next to me if he's not carrying weapons or explosives.

As much as it may be seen as a simple "hoop" to jump through, given the choice, I'd rather be on a plane full of folks that carry ID with them than one where anyone can get on just holding a ticket(If nothing else, I'm not stuck on a plane full of people who don't feel any accountability to their fellow passengers). You're not getting on a bus- there's a higher standard we should be holding air travel to due to its inherent vulnerability that other forms of transportation don't have- namely, one's inability to escape from the environment should a problem occur, in combination with how problems at 35k can lead to death much more easily and quickly. I'm not saying it's foolproof, we all know it isn't, but it's better than just saying the hell with ID's altogether.

Again, I think what you went through regarding the filming piece was pretty ridiculous, but carrying ID is an accepted practice pretty much everywhere you go except for something like the Burning Man festival where I think it's actually frowned upon! But I fail to see how carrying ID forfeits any liberties that my father bombed the Nazis to protect.

[Gerard]

. No ID required for me to drive a huge U-Haul truck to Manhattan from Albany and right through Times Square, Wall Street and The Village ...

But dont you need ID (Drivers license) to rent that U-Haul and you need to have that license with you while driving.
And not sure if I missed this but Mr. Mocek do you carry an ID with you? Do you have a drivers license?

[gonzalu]

But dont you need ID (Drivers license) to rent that U-Haul and you need to have that license with you while driving.
And not sure if I missed this but Mr. Mocek do you carry an ID with you? Do you have a drivers license?

Gerard, no, not at all... ANYONE could rent it, and I do not need a license to drive it there... Actually, I was not tested ONCE! If I confused you, my meanign is that whoever rents it does not have to be the one driving it and certainly you do not need the ID to drive it. IF you get pulled over and you do not have a license is a different story but I certainly don;t need it to get in the truck and drive it. When was the last time you showed your ID t o anyone to do anything? Do you ever show ID to drive from NY to LA? It may be assumed but that does not mean you needed it to actually do it. Just think about it...

BTW, I am only making an argument... I for one have ID, carry it and show it readily ... that's me. But, if I do not HAVE to it is nice to know.

William, does the screening process itself do nothing for your feeling of safety? Is it simply ID? So you;re saying that you do NOT trust TSA and the security checkpoints UNLESS it is accompanied by an ID check? Do you actually think the ID is checked against ANY database upon your passing through security? My actual identification, my real identification has NEVER been checked. I mean, they look at my driver's license, then at the ticket, and I move on... there is no computer, no list, nada.

I am shocked I am ever allowed though security... my passport picture looks nothing like me now. I rather the screening process and actual X-Rays, Bodyscans, etc. as as good as possible to make sure NOTHING that could be used as a weapon or explo s ive can get through! THAT is far more important. If the person next to me is John Doe but he is well screened, I am much more comfortable than if I knew him to be Joe Plumber but he just walked from the curb to the seat un checked!

[Gerard]

When was the last time you showed your ID to anyone to do anything?

The last time I flew. LOL!! When I got my boarding pass when I checked in my luggage. Then when I rented my car in Phoenix. And some
stores have started asking to see your license when you use a credit card. And last summer when I went to buy a beer at Yankee Stadium. They
check EVERYONES ID. If I didnt I dont get service. Of course I readily complied in ALL instances. Especially with the beer. :smile:
Like you said I carry it wherever I go and have no issue showing it.

[gonzalu]

But you DON'T use it or show it to a neighbor when getting into your daily missile, correct? What about when you go into the supermarket? Your house?

[Gerard]

But you DON'T use it or show it to a neighbor when getting into your daily missile, correct?

Uh HUH? :confused:

[gonzalu]

:confused:

[megatop412]

I think the screening process is only one component of an effective safety program. We have all gotten quite used to carrying our ID's over the course of our lives, the implicit assumption is that it contains verifiable information about your identity. Maybe the TSA doesn't scan people's licenses or other ID's, but maybe they should(just playing devil's advocate here). If you produce a fake ID, for whatever reason, that means you can be considered a criminal, and that makes me not want to be on a plane with you. If you did that, what's to stop you from engaging in other criminal activities that might affect me? I'm just taking this to its logical conclusion. Plus, the last several times I have flown, my ID was studied by the gate agent as well as the TSA staffer at the head of the line(that's how it's done in Philly anyway), and they checked to make sure the name on the ticket matches the name on the ID. Verifying identity is a completely separate issue than screening for dangerous items, but they certainly complement each other. Plus, with large beaurocracies like the TSA that put little children's names on the no-fly list among other things, I would think that it could help to have an ID they can run. A ticket in your hand only says you're in possession of a ticket, and nothing else.

So all of a sudden there's a backlash about carrying a photo ID? I don't understand this. Every time I have to interact with a cop, whether its spotting, or speeding, I expect to have to show ID. I think the same rule should have to apply in an airport. The screening process has flaws and everyone knows it(remember the 'pistol-packing granny' case 2 weeks ago), so it shouldn't be the only method of defense. So no, I don't think just a screening is enough since its obvious people can sneak guns on planes.

I'll say it again- when you enter an airport and then a plane you bear some level of accountability to your fellow passengers and should be able to produce an ID. It isn't a playground. Besides, the licenses that we faked years ago to buy beer were a little easier to forge than what most states issue today. Lastly, I'm sure people whose job it is to look at ID's and passports all day long get pretty decent at being able to spot a fake or altered ID. If we're going to operate off the assumption that ID's could be faked easily enough, then what is the point of having any ID at all?

[AirlineReporter]

So Phil M, I am one that is NOT a fan of the TSA by any means.

I wonder what has this incident done? Do you think policies have changed to better inform TSA officials? What has been worth the $34,000?

David

[gonzalu]

I think the screening process is only one component of an effective safety program. We have all gotten quite used to carrying our ID's over the course of our lives, the implicit assumption is that it contains verifiable information about your identity. Maybe the TSA doesn't scan people's licenses or other ID's, but maybe they should(just playing devil's advocate here). If you produce a fake ID, for whatever reason, that means you can be considered a criminal, and that makes me not want to be on a plane with you. If you did that, what's to stop you from engaging in other criminal activities that might affect me? I'm just taking this to its logical conclusion. Plus, the last several times I have flown, my ID was studied by the gate agent as well as the TSA staffer at the head of the line(that's how it's done in Philly anyway), and they checked to make sure the name on the ticket matches the name on the ID. Verifying identity is a completely separate issue than screening for dangerous items, but they certainly complement each other. Plus, with large beaurocracies like the TSA that put little children's names on the no-fly list among other things, I would think that it could help to have an ID they can run. A ticket in your hand only says you're in possession of a ticket, and nothing else.


So all of a sudden there's a backlash about carrying a photo ID? I don't understand this. Every time I have to interact with a cop, whether its spotting, or speeding, I expect to have to show ID. I think the same rule should have to apply in an airport. The screening process has flaws and everyone knows it(remember the 'pistol-packing granny' case 2 weeks ago), so it shouldn't be the only method of defense. So no, I don't think just a screening is enough since its obvious people can sneak guns on planes.

William, that's exactly the point, thank you for pointing it out. YOU have decided to simply trust whatever you are told to do or behave like and that's that... that is entirely your prerogative and your right. What I am trying to say, and what those folks that test the system are trying to say is, just because you told us to, does not mean we have to. William, have you really considered why you give your ID wherever you go? You don;t care why you are eing asked? You don't care if it is required or not required. Why do you trust the government implicitly? Remember now, there is a test at the end :-) YOU ARE the government... you, me, everyone. WE are the law makers, the law enforcers, the law reviewers, WE!!! us, you and I.

I am a law abiding citizen, not part of a herd of robots. I like to know why I have to or am supposed to do something. Please do not take that right away. Curiosity is the only thing keeping sane free citizens from those who are oppressed. Too much trust and someone will eventually have more power to do more as they are not questioned or challenged.

It is a fine balance between being civil and being ignorant. I like being civil which gives me the capacity to question and challenge, not be ignorant and not be an a**hole. Let's put it another way:

--Take a LAWYER, a Supreme Court Lawyer, years of experience, tons of hours in front of the bench. Knows the justices by first name and even has dinner with them.
--Said lawyer presents a case to the court asking if it is constitutional for a government agency to require government issued ID.

Would you say that is OK vs someone, a regular citizen, challenging a government agency demanding and requiring, with threat of arrest, ID? BTW, the minute a Police Officer or any person in a position of authority tells another person that they are "in trouble" that could be considered threatening and intimidating, both of which are considered offensive. NO ONE can threaten you, ever. You can ONLY be charged with a crime, arrested and charged with that crime. Processed, arraigned, brought up on criminal charges by a grand jury of regular citizens and then go in front of a judge in either a jury trial or not and then convicted of the crimes of which you are charged. That is the ONLY way I know someone can get you in trouble...

...well, for me, telling my mom is another way to get me in trouble :tongue:



I'll say it again- when you enter an airport and then a plane you bear some level of accountability to your fellow passengers and should be able to produce an ID. It isn't a playground. Besides, the licenses that we faked years ago to buy beer were a little easier to forge than what most states issue today. Lastly, I'm sure people whose job it is to look at ID's and passports all day long get pretty decent at being able to spot a fake or altered ID. If we're going to operate off the assumption that ID's could be faked easily enough, then what is the point of having any ID at all?

Who said it is a playground? PLAYING ALONG is what makes it a playground! Come on now... do you believe that Mr Mocek was acting like a child? He seemed pretty grown up to me. Regardless of what he was intentionally doing or not, he had a purpose when he intended to test the system instead of ignoring it and allowing it to be for the sake of being. It takes guts to do what he did as a Citizen with Rights... I know I am a coward because I would never have done it. But I admit I am afraid to test it... I go along with it just to not make a scene... but I know I may be giving up my rights by doing so... that is the whole point here. This is NOT anything to do with terrorism. YOU WELL KNOW that said terrorists are not going to use a hard target but a soft one. I worry more about the construction trucks entering JFK left and right 24x7x365. I don't see no metal detectors at those check points... NONE!!

And next time you're on a plane, try this. Ask the person next to you if their ID was really a valid one, given to them by a government agency. Ask them to prove it... and no, 3D holograms have been cracked already. This is why credit card companies have three forms of verification ... I NEVER have to show ID when I use my credit card, ever! As a matter of fact, William, the LAW does not require it! :P and most credit card companies do NOT require it either. The businesses ask for it to protect themselves from chargebacks.

[Zee71]

"I worry more about the construction trucks entering JFK left and right 24x7x365"


This has some truth Manny, and I am concerned too. One day I was having lunch near where some of the construction trucks would line up and get escorted to the ramp, but at time there were none. As I'm having my lunch a security vehicle pulls up next to me and asked if I needed an escort to the ramp? Is it really that simple? Sure they probably would have taken my plate number, etc. but if I played along I'm sure I would have been driving on the ramp. I can only hope the screening and inspection process for entering the ramp area is beefed up.

[gonzalu]

I have to say this though, when I went to the Singapore and the ANA press events, security was SUPER TIGHT!!!!! I was almost cavity searched and I had to submit my ID way in advance and be CLEARED. And I was NOT FLYING...

While at the Singapore event, to get into the airplane cabin, there were two private security guards at each door (that's 4 total) and they screened EVERYONE very very hard... even the pilots, the Singapore engineers, and food people, OTHER security guards from other agencies were screened. I left the plane for a second to put down my coat and almost could not get back in. I was very impressed. None of the four guards smiled nor made idle chat nothing... they were extremely professional.

[Gerard]

Where did Mocek go? Maybe Nick and Mannys back-and-forth scared him more than the TSA and APD combined. :eek::biggrin:

[gonzalu]

Where did Mocek go? Maybe Nick and Mannys back-and-forth scared him more than the TSA and APD combined. :eek::biggrin:

Ha! I doubt it... I am sure he has other more purpose related websites and blogs to deal with than our somewhat dedicated site here. Besides, I am a NOBODY in the grand scheme of things... no reason to be afraid of me for anything LOL... That would be hilarious. :cool: Although come to think of it, I would have shot a much better video ... perhaps even use asteadycam! nyah nyah nyah

[NIKV69]

Where did Mocek go?

Maybe he opened a school that teaches airline travelers to fight an armed terrorist so next time they go through a check point they can tell the TSA they aren't needed. Since we can all regain control of the aircraft in case we run into any terrorists.

[Gerard]

Maybe he opened a school that teaches airline travelers to fight an armed terrorist so next time they go through a check point they can tell the TSA they aren't needed. Since we can all regain control of the aircraft in case we run into any terrorists.

Yeah WTF was that? :tongue:
And I'm still trying to figure out what my "daily missle" is. :eek::cool:

[gonzalu]

Yeah WTF was that? :tongue:
And I'm still trying to figure out what my "daily missle" is. :eek::cool:

Your car, Gerard... Just your everyday car. There are thousands each day out on the road... back and forth up and down. It was stated as a joke but not really. It is related to my point that there are many things we take for granted that have the potential to cause much harm and they go on day in and day out with little checks and balances. That was one of the points I tried to make.

[mirrodie]

Nicks school post... that was hilarious.


You know, I just read through this thread....one thing I've been thinking about since there was a big uproar in NY regarding NYS driving licenses:

Our licenses as a form of ID....is one big fat joke. YOu renew it every 8 years with an OPTION to renew the photo.

Now sure, I still have my college photo in there, but look nothing like my college pic.....what the heck kind of ID purpose is that/??!

[pmocek]

Mr. Mocek do you carry an ID with you? Do you have a drivers license?

I am licensed by the state of Washington to drive on public roads. I carry documentation of such when driving on public roads. If I plan to leave the United States, I carry my passport (and I carry it when I return, though international treaty obligations require our border guards to allow me re-entry to my home country regardless of whether I'm carrying a passport). At most other times, whether I carry any cards or documents with with me is just a matter of convenience.



Phil, as you state in your video above, you wanted a jury of your peers to see the evidence and find you not guilty for reasons of you believing you were within your rights.
It's not so much that I was "within my rights" but that I did not violate any law. It seems maybe you and others think of this trial as a test of whether intending to go through airport with no documentation besides one's valid boarding pass is lawful, or whether it's lawful to use your camera to record some public employees interacting with you and other people in public at a public airport. Those are lawful, but I wasn't charged with either of those things. I did not do what the police claimed I did. Officers Dilley, Wiggins, and De La Pena all lied in their reports.

The document checker guy didn't like me using my camera. His grouchy manager didn't either, and either tried to steal it from me or to grab my arm. They called the police, then reported, "First of all he's refusing to show ID. Second of all he's videotaping and taking pictures of the process." Breedon knew that I didn't have to show ID. He told me so in the first ten seconds of our interaction when I reached the front of the line. And the idea that it would be unlawful to use a camera in a public to get images or video of things that thousands of people see every day, is laughable. But that's what he told the police.

Albuquerque Aviation Police Department Officer Dilley told me to do whatever the security guards told me to do, and when I explained -- calmly and politely -- that I knew there was no rule against using my camera, he started to eject me from the airport. I immediately complied, walking away with him.

He then stopped and told me I had to show him ID. This was not based in law, and it would have been impossible for me to do so. He never asked who I was -- for me to identify myself -- only that I show him ID. I told him I didn't have it, so he took my bags, walked me over to the airport police office, and locked me in a cell. He made up a story about what had happened, claiming that I said and did things I not do, in support of his claim that I violated four laws, then signed this falsified report under penalty of perjury.

It's really that simple.


If the jury had not found in your favor, how would you have felt?

I suppose I would have felt that they were mistaken, or that they had been convinced by the prosecution that even though I was not guilty of the things of which I was accused, I should be punished anyway.


How would you have reacted?

I suppose my immediate reaction would have been about the same, but without the hugs from my partner, my parents, and my lawyers. Then, instead of seeking avice about filing a civil suit, I'd have saught advice about appealing the decision.


Would your life or views have changed as a result?

That would have depended on whether or not my appeal was successful, and whether jail time was imposed as punishment.


I ask because it sounds from your tone and demeanor that you are genuinely interested in what's right and wrong.

Very much so.


I would love to hear your opinion if the decision by the jury had been for the plaintiffs?

My opinion would have been that they were incorrect. I did not do the things of which I was accused.


Thank you for taking the time to openly discuss this case as well as your beliefs with us.

You're welcome. Thanks, again, for your interest in my case and in the surrounding issues.

[pmocek]

I'd rather be on a plane full of folks that carry ID with them than one where anyone can get on just holding a ticket (If nothing else, I'm not stuck on a plane full of people who don't feel any accountability to their fellow passengers).

What about the documents people carry makes you more comfortable about them? What about the same people, without documentation of identity, would make you uncomfortable? How does having identified themselves to government agents make those people any more accountable to other passengers? It's not like they're on a bus that they can jump off of and run away. If they do something wrong, they're not going to run away from everyone.


You're not getting on a bus- there's a higher standard we should be holding air travel to due to its inherent vulnerability that other forms of transportation don't have- namely, one's inability to escape from the environment should a problem occur, in combination with how problems at 35k can lead to death much more easily and quickly.

That might explain why we search people for weapons before they board airplanes, but not before they board buses. I don't understand how their identities are related to their potential to cause harm.


I'm not saying it's foolproof, we all know it isn't, but it's better than just saying the hell with ID's altogether.

How so?


carrying ID is an accepted practice pretty much everywhere you go

Yes, it seems everybody is doing it. So what?


I fail to see how carrying ID forfeits any liberties that my father bombed the Nazis to protect.

Carrying documentation of your identity may not forfeit your liberties. Having your movement restricted because someone, somewhere, added your name to a blacklist, without any due process or means of appeal, is most certainly an infringement upon the liberties your father fought to protect.




If you [present] a fake ID [to airport security guards], for whatever reason, that means you can be considered a criminal, and that makes me not want to be on a plane with you.

When I'm on a plane, I don't care if the other people on the plane identified themselves accurately, inaccurately, or at all, to security guards. That someone violated a law in the process of traveling anonymously is not of the least concern to me.


If you did that, what's to stop you from engaging in other criminal activities that might affect me?

You could say the same of any action. If someone brushed his teeth that morning, what's to stop him from engaging in criminal activities that might affect you?


I'm just taking this to its logical conclusion.

To be clear: Your "logical conclusion" sounds to be that if someone is willing to use a fake ID, he's likely to be the sort of person who would murder a planeload of people.


Plus, the last several times I have flown, my ID was studied by the gate agent as well as the TSA staffer at the head of the line(that's how it's done in Philly anyway), and they checked to make sure the name on the ticket matches the name on the ID.

Sure, they did. Otherwise, you could re-sell the airline ticket you purchased just like you can resell *any other* ticket (movie, sporting event, bus) you purchased, and just like you could re-sell an airplane ticket not so long ago.


[Verifying identity and searching people for dangerous items] certainly complement each other.

How so?


A ticket in your hand only says you're in possession of a ticket, and nothing else.

It also indicates that someone has purchased a flight. A dollar in your hand says you'r ein possession of dollar, and nothing else. If you have a dollar, you should be entitled to spend it, and if you are in possession of an airline ticket, you should be entitled to a plane ride.


Every time I have to interact with a cop, whether its spotting, or speeding, I expect to have to show ID.

You may expect to be required to do so every time, but you are not required to do so every time. Every time I interact with a cop, I expect him or her to lie to other people about our interaction unless I am sufficiently meek and subservient. That doesn't mean that such will be the case, or that it is just for such to be the case.



its obvious people can sneak guns on planes.


I agree. Please note that requiring people to identify themselves and wait for permission from the government before they travel does not prevent them from sneaking guns onto airplanes.


I'm sure people whose job it is to look at ID's and passports all day long get pretty decent at being able to spot a fake or altered ID.

Those are the same people who are searching for guns using metal detectors, virtual strip searches, and police-style body searches.


If we're going to operate off the assumption that ID's could be faked easily enough, then what is the point of having any ID at all?

Good question.

[pmocek]

I'm still trying to figure out what my "daily missle" is.

I suspect the OP meant to refer to your automobile. 30,000 people die in traffic accidents on U.S. roads every year. You and your car and me and my car are among the biggest threats to transportation safety.



I wonder what has this incident done?

It showed people that if you stand up to the lies of airport security guards and airport police, you won't be convicted of things you didn't do. It clarified that TSA "officers" are not law enforcement officers, that we have the right to fly without presenting documentation of our identities, that we have the right to film in public areas of airports, and that it's wise to do so. I hope it will make other people more likely to question the unlawful demands of TSA staff (e.g., identity checkpoints, virtual strip searches, gropings) and that it will make local police think twice before putting someone through the wringer because some airport rent-a-cop gets annoyed and tells them to.


Do you think policies have changed to better inform TSA officials?

Those policies are kept secret (except for the tents of thousands of low-level airport security staff who get to read them), so I can only guess. I don't think the higher-ups at TSA care if their airport staff are well-informed.


What has been worth the $34,000?

I was facing a year in jail. Maintaining my freedom was worth a lot more than $34,000.

[mirrodie]

Some advice perhaps to be considered:

You're sending an awful lot of time responding to our pithy comments. Perhaps a 2nd job or some serious overtime can erase that legal bill.

[gonzalu]

Some advice perhaps to be considered:

You're sending an awful lot of time responding to our pithy comments. Perhaps a 2nd job or some serious overtime can erase that legal bill.

Mario, you hiring? :tongue:

[Gerard]

Some advice perhaps to be considered:
You're sending an awful lot of time responding to our pithy comments.

Yeah and I'm seriously glazed over with this topic. It has developed into the circle game.

[gonzalu]

Gerard, next time I see you am gonna punch you in the bicep! :wink:

[megatop412]

I think it's great we've been able to have a hearty and (mostly) respectful debate about this, but I too am glazed over by now. It sure seems that everything that was needed said has been. All I know is that 2 weeks ago, nobody cared one iota about being asked for their ID, and that when I travel to my cousin's wedding in April, I plan to actually get there and not f**k things up by telling people I don't need to show my ID and then filming their response to that. I do plan on telling anyone who tries to stop me from photographing at PHL or BNA that that is perfectly legal behavior. I don't get intimidated easily.

Mr. Mocek, good luck to you in your future endeavors.

See you guys(still no gals here yet?) at Bay Harbour Mall or the mounds sometime soon.

-William Rizzo

[PhilDernerJr]

Phil, your discussion has been great, as said, thank you for you taking the time.

I do, however, have one question that I don't think was directly asked or answered.

Did you enter the airport without ID and with a camera knowing that you would likely have a confrontation with TSA? I just get the feeling you were looking for this incident to happen.

[Gerard]

This is too funny and timely.
On Fridays episode of "Fringe"the killer was a TSA employee and picked out his victims during screening.
He got the info from their.....IDs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!
And he used to be a Math professor at MIT who went a little wacky. Mmmm, good background check there. :eek:

[mirrodie]

Lol dude, I was thinking the same thing while watching fringe!!

No, not hiring just yet. But to be honest, if I had an applicant whose past behavior seems to indicate that he wants to challenge "the system", I don't know if that would be the best person for our team.

[NIKV69]

Phil, your discussion has been great, as said, thank you for you taking the time.

I do, however, have one question that I don't think was directly asked or answered.

Did you enter the airport without ID and with a camera knowing that you would likely have a confrontation with TSA? I just get the feeling you were looking for this incident to happen.

Of course he did, which is why he is not answering. He is an activist, as is his lawyer. He went in there planning for this to happen and planning to get video of TSA as well. I think he didn't plan on it as going as far as it did with the arrest though in the back of his mind he knew it was possible.

[pmocek]

Did you enter the airport without ID and with a camera knowing that you would likely have a confrontation with TSA?

If by "likely have a confrontation" you mean "likely need to interact with TSA staff who are misinformed and/or likely to lie about their own policies and might try to prevent me from traveling" then yes, I did enter without ID (didn't have any on me), with a camera (I almost always have one with me), and with the knowledge that I would likely have such a confrontation (you never know how far they'll go). I had been through airport security multiple times after presenting only a boarding pass, but had not done so since TSA announced (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/practical-travel-safety-issues/1122783-tsas-airline-passenger-identification-policies.html) that people who claimed their documentation of identity was misplaced or stolen would still be allowed to fly but that those who willfully refused to present it would not (making very clear that their policy is about conditioning people for compliance, not about ensuring safety).

[Gerard]

I'm curious. How did the Cannabis Defense Coalition get involved with your case?
http://cdc.coop/about

[pmocek]

How did the Cannabis Defense Coalition get involved with your case?
http://cdc.coop/about

Cannabis Defense Coalition (http://cdc.coop/about) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit member cooperative focused on drug law reform in Washington State. I'm a member and I serve on the board of directors. In 2009, I was in Albuquerque representing CDC at Drug Policy Alliance (http://www.drugpolicy.org/about-drug-policy-alliance)'s biennial international drug policy reform conference (http://www.reformconference.org/).

For more on the connection, please see http://cdc.coop/tsa_arrest. For a concise view of what CDC does, please see our project page: http://cdc.coop/projects