|
|
 Up |
  |
Date: Apr 30, 2008 01:45
The following very slightly edited posting appeared on uk.legal
yesterday. This may be of special interest to any Radio Amateurs
travelling to the US via Heathrow - or doubtless any other UK airport.
I leave it to the great legal minds on ukra - such as those who
believe the Assistant Chief Constable of Leicestershire's
pronouncements about carrying knives - to form an opinion on whether
"we frisk the kid with your consent or you don't get to fly" is
coercion or not.
Please, no comments about 'having nothing to hide...'
-----
From: Mike Ross corestore.org>
Newsgroups: uk.legal
Subject: mostly OT: Rant: Heathrow
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 09:37:40 -0400
Yesterday I had the dubious pleasure of flying back to the USA,
through Heathrow for the first time in a long time. It was so
bizarre I actually made notes; I swear to you this is 100%% true. How
did we get to this point? Where did we lose it all? When did we
surrender?
|
| Show full article (2.84Kb) |
| 14 Comments |
|
|
Author: CatweazelCatweazel Date: Apr 30, 2008 02:03
On Apr 30, 9:47 am, Spike wrote:> The following very slightly edited posting appeared on uk.legal
> yesterday. This may be of special interest to any Radio Amateurs
> travelling to the US via Heathrow - or doubtless any other UK airport.
>
[snip]
>
That's enough to put a lot of people off flying to the Land of the
Brave.
I wonder if going by boat would be anything like [other than
travelling much slower].
- -
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Apr 30, 2008 02:47
>If you think any of those checks/body search was too stringent, you
>want to try flying El Al.
Oh....I don't want to fly at all.
I put this on here for the benefit of those who might want to fly to
the US, especially if they are taking an item such as a transceiver
and have minor children with them.
A small point...who pays for the police in these circumstances, as
there may be more armed policed at Heathrow than ordinary bobbies
patrolling Cornwall, Devon, and Dorset at any one time.
--
from
Aero Spike
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Steve TerrySteve Terry Date: Apr 30, 2008 05:32
"Spike" wrote in message
news:s3bg14tc28fsp10hd28tvfvulk330egboi@4ax.com...>
>
> (1) re. frisking. I had no problem being frisked. When they said they
> wanted to frisk my five year old son too, I had had enough - they
> asked for my consent, I declined to give it. I said I had no problem
> with him being frisked if the law required them to do it, and/or
> authorised them to do it, but I wouldn't aquiesce to this nonsense or
> co-operate with it: "do it if you must, but not with my consent".
> Their ultimate response was 'you must explicitly consent or neither of
> you are flying anywhere'. I consider 'consent' in the face of a
> serious threat of that nature to be no consent at all; where does the
> law stand on issues of 'consent, or else'?
> from
> Aero Spike
>
Gets even better when you arrive at JFK, the special relationship
when have with the US means we queue for an hour,
before getting the third degree from US immigration, ...
|
| Show full article (1.31Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: class_aclass_a Date: Apr 30, 2008 14:37
Spike wrote:
> The following very slightly edited posting appeared on uk.legal
> yesterday. This may be of special interest to any Radio Amateurs
> travelling to the US via Heathrow - or doubtless any other UK airport.
Long list of stuff snipped....
Well, that sounds like a Heathrow issue..... just over two months ago I
flew from the Dulles (US) to the Amsterdam and then onwards to the UK.
I later flew from Dublin back to Dulles.
The strictest security of those three airports was Dublin! Passport
scan and e-ticket reference to get boarding pass from machine,
passport/visa and BP checked when dropping off bags at check-in, BP
checked at security (empty pockets etc), passport checked at
immigration, BP checked at gate with stub returned.
Doesn't sound unreasonable to me!
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Apr 30, 2008 16:51
class_a wrote:
>Spike wrote:
>
>> The following very slightly edited posting appeared on uk.legal
>> yesterday. This may be of special interest to any Radio Amateurs
>> travelling to the US via Heathrow - or doubtless...
|
| Show full article (1.03Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Brian ReayBrian Reay Date: Apr 30, 2008 23:05
"Spike" wrote in message
news:s3bg14tc28fsp10hd28tvfvulk330egboi@4ax.com...>
> The following very slightly edited posting appeared on uk.legal
> yesterday. This may be of special interest to any Radio Amateurs
> travelling to the US via Heathrow - or doubtless any other UK airport.
>
> I leave it to the great legal minds on ukra - such as those who
> believe the Assistant Chief Constable of Leicestershire's
> pronouncements about carrying knives - to form an opinion on whether
> "we frisk the kid with your consent or you don't get to fly" is
> coercion or not.
>
Given that those who blow up aircraft seem prepared to blow up "kids" I
suspect they would be happy to use "kids" as "couriers" as well. Equally,
you can't assume that all those minded to blow things up are "non-white".
So, the security checks seem more than sensible.
|
| Show full article (0.92Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: May 1, 2008 00:16
Brian Reay wrote:
>
>
>"Spike" wrote in message
>news:s3bg14tc28fsp10hd28tvfvulk330egboi@4ax.com...>>
>> The following very slightly edited posting appeared on uk.legal
>> yesterday. This may...
|
| Show full article (1.09Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: jim stewartjim stewart Date: May 1, 2008 04:11
> So, the security checks seem more than sensible.
>
I am sure they check for things that might be taped to your body ......
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: james stewartjames stewart Date: May 1, 2008 04:37
>
>> So, the security checks seem more than sensible.
>>
>
> I am sure they check for things that might be taped to your body ......
>
or head .......
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
