4 ms·

That's the same feeling I was getting from this article. It was completely disingenuous (or better put, an outright lie) to say that he was not detained. The po

That's the same feeling I was getting from this article. It was completely disingenuous (or better put, an outright lie) to say that he was not detained. The police were keeping him against his will to determine if he was guilty of a crime. That pretty well fits the definition of detainment.

etchalon 13y ago
The article makes it very clear what "detained" vs. "not detained" means, in this context. Mukerjee wasn't being detained, or kept, beyond the basic protocol of "unscreened passengers have to be escorted out of the terminal." Mukerjee was free to leave, he simple had to leave the building entirely. He could not just leave and then step back into line, as was his intention, for numerous utterly sane reasons.
- Amadou 13y ago
  So they have their procedures. But that raises the question - what is the point? Let's assume the threat is real, someone with nefarious intent is not-detained, escorted to outside the building and left to his own devices. What is to stop him from simply turning around, re-entering the building and going through a different screening station? I'm pretty sure the answer is "security theater."
  - etchalon 13y ago
    Well, if you'd read the rest of the article, you'd see the procedures are designed to ensure that, if he's going to do that, he's doing it without any implement of harm on him, or least not one the TSA can find. Also, pointing out that it's impossible to deter a truly convicted person from a heinous act does not mean all deterrents are pointless. Yes, MUCH of what the TSA does is theater, and doesn't do much to keep us safe. Yes, much of it is theater. But based on all the evidence provided in both his account, and the one above, the TSA acted in a completely sane way in this incident.
    - einhverfr 13y ago
      That does not mean he wasn't detained. If you aren't free to go, you are detained. If you are pulled over for speeding, until the officer lets you go, you are detained. So not only was he detained but his bag was seized. Now arguably everyone is briefly detained by the TSA on condition of travel, and arguably all bags are seized briefly. However, that is why there needs to be scrutiny on these practices.
      - etchalon 13y ago
        As was stated, he wasn't detained. He was told he could leave the airport, escorted by personnel, but that his bag had to remain. So he chose to stay.
        moocowduckquack 13y ago
        He was told he could leave the airport, escorted by personnel, but that his bag had to remain. Being told you can walk away if you like but we are keeping your stuff, is usually a form of theft.
        einhverfr 13y ago
        Not a form of theft, but it is a seizure of property. This is interesting. The argument is over whether he was detained or whether his property was seized. Fun shell game there. Not....
        einhverfr 13y ago
        "Wait here for someone who will escort you out" = "he was detained." "The bag had to remain" = "they seized his bag."
    - glenra 13y ago
      > Yes, MUCH of what the TSA does is theater, and doesn't do much to keep us safe. Yes, much of it is theater. ALL of what the TSA does is theater, and it actively makes us LESS safe. Their actions cause over a thousand unnecessary deaths a year by making air travel less convenient and more expensive so people who drive when they would otherwise fly get killed in auto accidents. There is no evidence they have saved even a single life with any of these precautions, much less the thousand-a-year they'd need for the billions we spend on them to be a break-even proposition.
- einhverfr 13y ago
  Either he was detained or his bag was seized, or both. Keep in mind that if you are pulled over for speeding, you are technically detained for the duration of the traffic stop.
- tacticus 13y ago
  He also had to surrender his bags.
  - einhverfr 13y ago
    IOW his bags were seized.

etchalon 13y ago

The article makes it very clear what "detained" vs. "not detained" means, in this context. Mukerjee wasn't being detained, or kept, beyond the basic protocol of "unscreened passengers have to be escorted out of the terminal." Mukerjee was free to leave, he simple had to leave the building entirely. He could not just leave and then step back into line, as was his intention, for numerous utterly sane reasons.

Amadou 13y ago
So they have their procedures. But that raises the question - what is the point? Let's assume the threat is real, someone with nefarious intent is not-detained, escorted to outside the building and left to his own devices. What is to stop him from simply turning around, re-entering the building and going through a different screening station? I'm pretty sure the answer is "security theater."
- etchalon 13y ago
  Well, if you'd read the rest of the article, you'd see the procedures are designed to ensure that, if he's going to do that, he's doing it without any implement of harm on him, or least not one the TSA can find. Also, pointing out that it's impossible to deter a truly convicted person from a heinous act does not mean all deterrents are pointless. Yes, MUCH of what the TSA does is theater, and doesn't do much to keep us safe. Yes, much of it is theater. But based on all the evidence provided in both his account, and the one above, the TSA acted in a completely sane way in this incident.
  - einhverfr 13y ago
    That does not mean he wasn't detained. If you aren't free to go, you are detained. If you are pulled over for speeding, until the officer lets you go, you are detained. So not only was he detained but his bag was seized. Now arguably everyone is briefly detained by the TSA on condition of travel, and arguably all bags are seized briefly. However, that is why there needs to be scrutiny on these practices.
    - etchalon 13y ago
      As was stated, he wasn't detained. He was told he could leave the airport, escorted by personnel, but that his bag had to remain. So he chose to stay.
      - moocowduckquack 13y ago
        He was told he could leave the airport, escorted by personnel, but that his bag had to remain. Being told you can walk away if you like but we are keeping your stuff, is usually a form of theft.
        einhverfr 13y ago
        Not a form of theft, but it is a seizure of property. This is interesting. The argument is over whether he was detained or whether his property was seized. Fun shell game there. Not....
      - einhverfr 13y ago
        "Wait here for someone who will escort you out" = "he was detained." "The bag had to remain" = "they seized his bag."
  - glenra 13y ago
    > Yes, MUCH of what the TSA does is theater, and doesn't do much to keep us safe. Yes, much of it is theater. ALL of what the TSA does is theater, and it actively makes us LESS safe. Their actions cause over a thousand unnecessary deaths a year by making air travel less convenient and more expensive so people who drive when they would otherwise fly get killed in auto accidents. There is no evidence they have saved even a single life with any of these precautions, much less the thousand-a-year they'd need for the billions we spend on them to be a break-even proposition.
einhverfr 13y ago
Either he was detained or his bag was seized, or both. Keep in mind that if you are pulled over for speeding, you are technically detained for the duration of the traffic stop.
tacticus 13y ago
He also had to surrender his bags.
- einhverfr 13y ago
  IOW his bags were seized.