Acting Like A Parent Is Now "Disorderly Conduct"
A mother in Nashville rightly refused to have her daughter groped by the TSA, writes Erin Quinn in the Tennessean:
A 41-year-old Clarksville woman was arrested after Nashville airport authorities say she was belligerent and verbally abusive to security officers, refusing for her daughter to be patted down at a security checkpoint.Andrea Fornella Abbott yelled and swore at Transportation Security Administration agents Saturday afternoon at Nashville International Airport, saying she did not want her daughter to be "touched inappropriately or have her "crotch grabbed," a police report states.
After the woman refused to calm down, airport police said, she was charged with disorderly conduct and taken to jail. She has been released on bond.
Using profanity always gives people an excuse to dismiss what you're saying -- or jail you. The same goes for yelling. Dismissing you is their right, but jailing you? This shouldn't be. The Supreme Court said in Cohen v. California (the "fuck the draft" case) that sometimes the wrong words are precisely the right words to convey a message.
I don't know what this woman said, but "Don't fucking touch my daughter's vagina" sends a stronger message than, "I think screening a kid using what would otherwise be 'inappropriate touch' is really out of line."
Surprised that I'd say that as an author of a book on manners? Don't be. It isn't rude to be civilly disobedient. Quite the contrary. Civil disobedience is a call to make government and authorities act well-mannered -- in the sense that it is good civic manners to accord Americans all the rights granted us under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, including our Fourth Amendment rights.
via Lisa Simeone
UPDATE: Lisa Simeone emails a link to defense lawyer Mark Bennett's blog, noting:
Carolyn Piphus is the judge who signed off on the arrest affidavit for "disorderly conduct" against the Nashville mother Andrea Fornella Abbott.
Bennett blogs at Defending People, "Carolyn Piphus is a Fool":
(a) A person commits an offense who, in a public place and with intent to cause public annoyance or alarm:(1) Engages in fighting or in violent or threatening behavior;
(2) Refuses to obey an official order to disperse issued to maintain public safety in dangerous proximity to a fire, hazard or other emergency; or
(3) Creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act that serves no legitimate purpose.
(b) A person also violates this section who makes unreasonable noise that prevents others from carrying on lawful activities.
Tennessee Code 39-17-305.
Does this look like probable cause to you?:
Nashville Airport Arrest Affidavit (excerpt):
On 07/09/2011 at approximately 1340 hrs I was dispatched to the central screening point at the Nashville International Airport for report of a passenger that was refusing screening. Upon my arrival,I made contact with the subject, identified as Andrea Abbott, who was involved in a verbal altercationwith TSA screening agents. Abbott was being verbally abusive toward the TSA agents stating her daughter would not be screened. I advised Abbott that she and her daughter would have to be screenedor they would be escorted by me out of the secured area of the airport. Abbott then became verballyabusive toward me as well as the TSA agents. Abbott stated she did not want her daughter to be"touched inappropriately," have her "crotch grabbed," or be further screened. Eventually Abbottagreed to allow her daughter to be screened by TSA. Abbott retrieved her cell phone and wasattempting to film her daughter being screened. I advised Abbott to put her cell phone away. Again,Abbott was verbally abusive. After her daughter was screened TSA advised Abbott would have to bescreened as well to continue down the concourse. Abbott stated this was "bullshit" and becameverbally abusive toward TSA and myself again. I advised Abbott numerous times she was disruptingthe screening process and flow of passengers through the area. Abbott refused to calm down. At thistime I placed Abbott under arrest for Disorderly Conduct (TCA 39-17-305). Ms. Abbot was loud inher speech and very belligerant therefore she was arrested for disorderly conduct.
From another one of Bennett's blog items -- about how his family drove around the East Coast rather than flying, and why that was the better way to get around, vis a vis the TSA searches (and what we need to do about them):
Fear is still the order of the day, the "whatever it takes" quislings are still running the show, and we're still expected to submit ourselves and our loved ones to the not-so-gentle ministrations of the mall-cop wannabes in the security line in order to get on a plane (or maybe a train, or a ferry, or a subway, or a bus...).So was the additional risk of driving justified? You bet!
Our days of driving around the country free from TSA interference are limited, if many more people don't get off their complacent fear-raddled fat American butts and stand up for our shared freedom, but we'll keep enjoying these days while we can.
Where the hell is the ACLU? Isn't this the very thing they're supposed to be fighting?
Patrick at July 14, 2011 3:44 AM
Where the hell is the ACLU? Isn't this the sort of thing they should be going after?
I suspect their stance will be something like "You absolutely have the right to refuse to be searched by security. However, if the search is a condition of entry, you should leave immediately." At least that's what I saw on Flex Your Rights.
Patrick at July 14, 2011 3:57 AM
I, too, am kind of disgusted with the ACLU, the national organization anyway. The locals still do amazing work.
The national has been collecting stories since last November. They've done nothing. EPIC has filed a lawsuit that's making its way through the appeals process (after they lost, of course, on the initial go-round with our overlords).
But if you read Wendy Kaminer's book, WORST INSTINCTS, the ACLU's position starts to make sense. It's more interested in p.c. shit than in defending freedom of speech.
Anyway, here's a new story about another elderly woman being groped:
94-Year-Old Woman Says TSA Crossed the Line with Pat Down
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/topstories/article/210840/483/94-Year-Old-Woman-Says-TSA-Crossed-the-Line-with-Pat-Down
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 5:36 AM
I said before we flew in march, and I say now before we fly in Jan-I'll go to jail before I'll let my kids be scanned or groped. So good for her. That said, if you can stay logical and calm while stating your case,it's better. Hard to do, esp when involving your kids, but better. Making the other side look like the unreasonable ones works well. As it is she can be dismissed as a screaming kook.
momof4 at July 14, 2011 5:37 AM
Two members have contributed "master lists" of TSA abuses, crimes, etc.:
Fisher1949's list (updated 6/26/2011)
Lisa Simeone's list (updated 7/10/2011)
http://www.travelunderground.org/index.php?threads/master-lists-of-tsa-abuses-crimes.317/
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 5:55 AM
Is there something about the TSA that attracts homosexual sadists to apply for the job ?
I know that is very non p.c., but someone had to ask eventually.
I'm a male hetero. The last thing I would seek is a job that required me to touch another man's genitals even with the back of my hand.
Nick at July 14, 2011 6:06 AM
Nick, though it pains me to say it, fair is fair, and the fact is most TSA agents took their jobs having no idea they'd be required to grope passengers. Remember that this molestation regime was rolled out nationally only last November. It had been "tested" at two airports before then -- Las Vegas and Boston -- beginning in January 2010.
TSA has incredibly high turnover and low morale -- surprise, surprise -- with many people quitting because they can't stand the agency, their managers, and what they're now required to do. But of course individual agents can decide to be less grasping, more compassionate, to only go through the motions of a "pat-down" but not actually grope, etc.
I'm just afraid that in this economy, where the ONLY growing sector is the National Security State, lots of people can't risk losing their jobs. This makes it even harder for us to fight.
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 6:22 AM
P.S. Although yes, of course, sadists -- who exist in all societies, at all levels, in all professions -- are having a field day.
And as Zimbardo and Milgram demonstrated, even "ordinary" people can be induced to become sadistic very easily.
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 6:25 AM
While I understand that sometimes profanity fits the occassion, I am curious if book #2 (or 3 if you count Free Advice) contains less of it. It doesn't bother me but it did stop me from buying a copy for my mom, my two aunts and my grandmother when it first came out. While I think they'd appreciate the spirit of your writing, I know they'd find the swearing uneccessary. But that was only 4 sales, and perhaps my family is just part of a small percentage of the population that tries to limit their profanity.
Niki at July 14, 2011 6:45 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/07/14/being_a_parent.html#comment-2354784">comment from NikiFree Advice doesn't have swearing in it, but I wrote it with two other women in 1995, so it's not quite up to who I am and how I write now. There are actually very few swear words in "I See Rude People," and they always serve the text and the subject. For example, there are bits like this:
Which tell a story.
Then there's a story where my friend Jill Stewart tells the guy who's yelling and swearing that he needs to stop:
It's in a Marlon Brando email about calling my car thief:
Are people really so disturbed by words that they don't buy a book because of a few fucks in it? I guess. A pity, because I need to sell more books. Could have used those four sales. Every one counts. But, I write according to what needs to go in a book, and I can't write in fear that people won't buy it.
Amy Alkon at July 14, 2011 8:19 AM
Lisa Simeone, you've been on fire with this stuff. Thanks for sharing.
I said before we flew in march, and I say now before we fly in Jan-I'll go to jail before I'll let my kids be scanned or groped. So good for her. That said, if you can stay logical and calm while stating your case,it's better.
My wife and I are expecting our first child in September. I have real worries about how things are going to go when we subsequently fly back East to visit family, since, like Momof4, I have no intention of allowing any TSA employee to touch my child, nor will I allow her to be exposed to radiation on dubious grounds. I also have no intention of not traveling on a plane with her, because it's important she know her grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins, none of whom live in driving distance.
Christopher at July 14, 2011 8:28 AM
"Are people really so disturbed by words that they don't buy a book because of a few fucks in it? I guess."
You better believe it. I was a library clerk for five years. The people who happily used their black magic markers to protect the rest of us from naughty words were balanced by the ones who scribbled their own deranged world-views all over whatever book caught their eye, from expensive classical art books to Grandma's bag of Harlequin Romances. (I'm talking the g-rated Harlequins of old, which some of our patrons checked out by the truckload. Those suckers have gone through some changes!)
Pricklypear at July 14, 2011 8:47 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/07/14/being_a_parent.html#comment-2354831">comment from PricklypearWell, the next one has a naughty word right in the title. And I came up with the title, FYI, long before "Go the F*ck to Sleep," as a few who have read a few of the chapters know.
Amy Alkon at July 14, 2011 8:48 AM
The revolution will not be televised.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at July 14, 2011 9:01 AM
I am curious whether the whole bad word thing is generational. I'm in my mid 40's and the langauge didn't bother me and I know it was all in context. My aunts are all in their 60's and my grandma was in her mid 90's and F-bomb's do really bother them.
(For what its worth, I still bought 3 copies & Taubes should give you a cut for the 4 copies of Good Calories, Bad Calories I've purchased and given away as gifts!)
Niki at July 14, 2011 9:02 AM
I saw a demotivational poster that called the invasive TSA pat down "gate rape."
Thought I'd share it.
=========================
Apparently, the TSA is having quite an issue with its employees stealing things from passengers.
In July, Broward airport agent Nelson Santiago was caught with a passenger's iPad in his pants. It wasn't his first theft.
It wasn't the TSA's first theft.
[Note: I linked to the Santiago article in an earlier thread, but when I tried it out before linking it here, it moved very slowly, so I'm linking to a different article on prior TSA thefts instead.]
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/crime/6346-tsa-agents-charged-with-grand-larceny
Conan the Grammarian at July 14, 2011 9:06 AM
Bonus points for use of the word "quisling." So rarely get a chance to use it.
snakeman99 at July 14, 2011 9:19 AM
I miss George Carlin.
Pricklypear at July 14, 2011 9:31 AM
Me, too. And love the word "quisling."
(With our education levels what they are these days, parents are sure to start using it to name their kids.)
Amy Alkon at July 14, 2011 9:38 AM
Conan the Grammarian,
"Gate rape" has been the term used on the internet for quite some time, since way before Susie Castillo's experience anyway. Come to think of it, I bet it'll end up in the Oxford dictionary by the end of this year, with an attribution to first use, whenever that was.
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 9:40 AM
Amy,
Re "quisling" as a first name -- hilarious! A couple of friends and I exchange weird names whenever we come across them. Wish I'd kept them all in a file, cause I can't remember most of them now. I did once meet an Aquanetta here in Charm City, no joke; also a Velveeta. There was a guy I read about named Severious something-or-other. Anyway, as I say, wish I could remember them.
Do you know that in France there's a law against such naming? You have to submit the proposed name of your offspring to some govt agency for approval. I know, I know, it's crazy, and I'm not in favor of it, but it does prevent children from growing up with names that'll get them beat up on the playground.
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 9:44 AM
But, I write according to what needs to go in a book, and I can't write in fear that people won't buy it.
Posted by: Amy Alkon
Well, you could if you really wanted to, but then litereary quotes from others endorsing your book would probably read "Uninspired" or "Trite"
lujlp at July 14, 2011 10:04 AM
Quisling was his last name.
Vidkun Quisling was a Norwegian National Socialist who helped the Nazis take over Norway. The Times, the Daily Mail, and the BBC then turned his surname into a generic word referring to collaborationists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidkun_Quisling
=========================
We did the same thing when I was working in telephone collections and skip tracing department (long ago).
We had an Anita Guy, a Formica Dinette, and a few others that, like you, I cannot remember but at the time reduced us to hysterics upon mention.
Conan the Grammarian at July 14, 2011 10:37 AM
Lisa.. keep up the work on this. I really enjoy your posts and they inspire me to keep pushing back against the TSA in my local airports.
Now,where is BOTU? I am waiting for him to show up and tell us all how he "just can't get a boner over this issue" again. I do thoroughly enjoy being reminded that there are people out there that enjoy having thier 4th ammendment rights trampled. It keeps the fires burnin...
Sabrina at July 14, 2011 10:39 AM
Ah. And here I thought I'd found something new.
Conan the Grammarian at July 14, 2011 10:39 AM
I loathe swearing but if I have to swear at some jobsworth, I do it in another language.
What are they gonna do?
lsomber at July 14, 2011 11:00 AM
P.S. If I remember correctly, there are 12 fucks in "I See Rude People." (I can't recall how many shits there are.)
Amy Alkon at July 14, 2011 11:07 AM
Conan, oui, oui, we know Quisling was his last name -- we're laughing at the thought that somebody might decide to use it as a first name.
Sabrina, thanks. It's been a slog at times, because I come up against so many naysayers and people who just don't get it, but I'll keep fighting. I can only hope I'll one day get to fly again. I sure do miss traveling abroad.
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 11:11 AM
Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld patted down by TSA
http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/tsa/171501-former-defense-secretary-donald-rumsfeld-patted-down-by-tsa
Sorry if I'm late to the game; only just saw this. But you know they didn't grope him like they do us hoi polloi. I'm sure they just gave him a perfunctory pat-down.
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 12:25 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/07/14/being_a_parent.html#comment-2355213">comment from Lisa SimeoneThey should give out t-shirts: "I felt Donald Rumsfeld's balls!"
Amy Alkon at July 14, 2011 12:27 PM
Throw the parent in jail for child abuse, I say. She knew the kid would get the patdown if they did not walk through the scanner.
Seriously, this whole scene would have meant nothing to the child if the parent didn't over-react.
Side note: I thought this was a blog that derided any pandering to sentiments about children.
I also love the word "quisling" and its history--from WWII.
BOTU at July 14, 2011 12:42 PM
BOTU wrote: "Throw the parent in jail for child abuse, I say. She knew the kid would get the patdown if they did not walk through the scanner."
Welcome BOTU. I knew I could count on you...
By your(ridiculous) argument then, I say throw the TSA agent in jail for molestation, sexual assault of a minor, and endangering the well being a child. OH, and filing a false police report because by the definition of the law, she was NOT committing the crime of "Disorderly Conduct".
Sabrina at July 14, 2011 12:55 PM
Sabrina:
The TSA patdwns, and the CFL bulbs--I just can't get a boner up for 'em.
We throw polygamists in jail, and take their kids away from them--but TSA patdowns are what we are supposed to get angry about?
Polygamists can't even be left alone. We invade their homes, usually on trumped charges of child abuse (a common tactic--recognize it?)
You have to try to get patted down by a TSA employee.
And still no one has suggested how we keep bombs off of airlines. Are you cool when we pat down bearded Moslems with wild eyes? Or should they also be let on, tra-la, tra-la.
So, then we have some TSA agents selectively patting down. On top of that, then bombs will put on the bodies of those who are blond(e) and cute.
I just don;t see a way around this, if people do not want to go through the scanners.
BOTU at July 14, 2011 2:28 PM
And still no one has suggested how we keep bombs off of airlines.
Bullshit. We've addressed your specious reasoning countless times. I've posted the facts on aviation history and the LACK of bombs on planes for the vast majority of that history. And, again, you're wrong when you present, again, the false dichotomy of scanner vs. grope. But you don't like empirical evidence. You just like bleating.
Lisa Simeone at July 14, 2011 2:34 PM
Ditto, Lisa.
Not only have you been pointed to Ask The Pilot about this, BOTU, Hey Skipper has told you how to do this.
Tough to concentrate while thinking about your next pat-down, I guess.
Radwaste at July 14, 2011 3:16 PM
I'd never heard of Quisling before. Awesome word. Thanks for the education.
And hey, I think it was me that said I couldn't get a boner over this issue. Credit where credit is due :)
whistleDick at July 14, 2011 4:32 PM
BOTU...
"Are you cool when we pat down bearded Moslems with wild eyes? Or should they also be let on, tra-la, tra-la."
I don't support Islam in anyway at all, but I also don't believe that every.single.bearded Muslim is carrying a bomb. However, if the true threat is MUSLIM's, then why are AMERICANS being subjected to these searches. Why aren't we profiling then? Oh wait... that might hurt their feeeeelliiiinngs.
The searches are pointless anyway. It's been proven time and time again that the searches wouldn't have even caught the panty bomber, who's the reason these searches began anyway, so what good are they doing? What exactly are you being protected from? Tweezers? Shampoo? Please. The so called threats that we are told about regarding terrorists are also bullshit. TSA intelligence is saying these things are a "possible" threat but no where are they able to offer any proof that these threats actually exist. I am not going to get my panties in a bunch over a "possible" threat and I am certainly not willing to give up my 4th ammendment rights because of a "maybe". Hell, if a terrorist were staring me in the face with a pile of C4 at his feet I wouldn't give up my rights to make sheeple "feel safe". That's not how true Americans roll. He's just gonna have to take me out.
That threat the government keeps telling us we are under is always going to be there. There was a bomb threat in Times Square recently as well I believe. Do you also suggest that anyone who dares to venture to 42nd street also be subjected to an invasive pat down and searched simply for being there? Ridiculous.
You can't be protected from EVERYTHING. LIFE has risk. My odds of being killed by a drunk driver are higher than being blown up in a plane. What's next? Breathalizers for EVERYONE who drives a car on the highway?!
Sabrina at July 15, 2011 5:31 AM
That has been discussed.
Conan the Grammarian at July 15, 2011 9:49 AM
What's next? Breathalizers for EVERYONE who drives a car on the highway?!
That has been discussed.
No shit. Really? Heaven help us if that's true.
Sabrina at July 15, 2011 10:36 AM
Sabrina,
"However, if the true threat is MUSLIM's, then why are AMERICANS being subjected to these searches. "
You're aware that many Americans are muslim, right?
I agree with all your other points, but that statement is just so weird that I felt I had to point it out.
whistleDick at July 15, 2011 1:50 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/07/14/being_a_parent.html#comment-2357241">comment from whistleDickIslam is not a race or a people from a country of origin; it is a religion, to which people can convert...meaning you can have a girl who looks native Swedish who is a Muslim. (Of course, in conversion, there's no turning back, since Islam demands the slaughter of apostates, so convert with care.)
Amy Alkon at July 15, 2011 1:52 PM
Leave a comment