Man Arrested for Videotaping TSA Officials While Stripping Down to his Underwear
In clear contradiction of what Transportation Security Administration officials have stated in the past, a man was arrested for videotaping TSA officials at San Diego International Airport Friday.
Sam Wolanyk was also charged with "failing to complete the security process" - even though he seemed more than happy to allow them to search him when he stripped down to his underwear.
Wolanyk initially was asked to step into the see-through scanner, but opted to have them pat him down instead.
That was when he stripped down to his underwear.
According to the San Diego County Political Buzz Examiner:
“It was obvious that my underwear left nothing to the imagination,” he explained. “But that wasn’t enough for the TSA supervisor who was called to the scene and asked me to put my clothes on so I could be properly patted down.”
Wolanyk was then paraded through two terminals in his underwear. At one point during this interaction, he videotaped TSA officials with his iPhone, which was confiscated.
The incident was confirmed by Harbor Police Sergeant Rakos who said Wolanyk was arrested on two misdemeanors, “failing to complete the security process; violation code 7.01 and illegally recording the San Diego Airport Authority (they confiscated his iPhone); violation number 7.14 (a).”
It is not clear which "violation codes" he violated. A search though several San Diego city and county codes did not produce anything remotely close to what is listed above.
Perhaps he violated some type of San Diego Airport Authority code, but those codes are not listed on the airport's website. Or maybe I'm just not looking hard enough.
Regardless of what local code he may have violated, TSA officials have stated in the past that it is not illegal to videotape the screening process, but it is illegal to videotape the actual computer screens, which would be anticlimatic to videotape anyway considering all the stripping and groping and fondling occurring in places where you are allowed to videotape.
Another woman was also recently arrested in San Diego for videotaping the TSA screening process.
Powell also stated that there was another arrest of a woman who was allegedly illegally filming the x-ray, and TSA screening process with a video camera. The young woman’s camera was confiscated and she was given a citation and released from Harbor Police custody.
It was only last week that a man named John Tyner made headlines when he walked through a TSA checkpoint at San Diego International Airport with a video camera, recording himself telling TSA officials that if "you touch my junk and I'm going to have you arrested."
Tyner was escorted from the airport. Instead of being arrested for videotaping the security process, he is now facing a $10,000 fine and a civil suit for refusing to allow his junk to be groped.
Since then, TSA officials probably found some obscure law that allows them to arrest people for videotaping the screening process.
It's so obscure, that I haven't been able to find it posted anywhere.
Wolanyk is no stranger to controversy. He is also an open carry activist who recently won a $35,000 settlement from the City of San Diego for having been wrongfully arrested after openly carrying an unloaded gun in a holster.
Fujifilm's X-Pro1, now M Mount friendly
Olympus' Micro Four Thirds 75mm prime
Can you fix the focus on a blurry photo after the fact?
The birth of Mirrorless Cameras
The Joy Of Winning A Photo Contest
Choosing your first dSLR camera
New York City can be beautiful!
Choosing the Right Light Stand
Photojojo iPhone Telephoto Lens review — AudioCast
My week with Q
How To Become A Successful Photographer
"When the Wind Stopped" — poem with 4 photos
Creating The New Family Portrait
Tips for Textures
Cast aways - saving those photographic memories
One Man Show: My 25 Years With Digital Photography
Studio, Flash, & Available Light — Three Books Reviewed
Portrait styling: dangerous pairings
Adobe Photoshop CS6 Product Managers Interview Audiocast
A gift of flowers: unfold your senses
On Set of "Love & Robots" the Film
No-Brainer Setup For A Digital Photo Frame Exhibit - Part 3











San Diego 7 photo gallery — Just Be Love All Stay Cool
Planning “National Geographic” style photo travel
Wilderness Travel 1 Rainforests – Essential Gear
Backlighting Basics
What Moves You?
FIGURES IN MOTION: Decades of Evolving Personal Imagery in Photography, Part 7
Lomography Store, Austin, Texas — GALLERY
GALLERY — Up to $1,000 Reward for Cattle Rustlers
25% off on photography eBooks
eyePhone: The eBook for iPhone Photographers
Interview with Harold Davis — Closeup Maestro of Flowers & Water Drops
Interview with Steve Caplin — Photoshop Digital Artist, Commercial Illustrator, & Author
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 3 of 3
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 2 Of 3
Easy technique to select, edit and sequence keywords for web
How much should you charge for a photograph?






























Comments
I'd *really* like to see where these alleged codes are posted... or in any way available to the public.
It's from the SD County Regional Airport Authority codes.
http://www.san.org/documents/corp_serv/Codes/Article%207/Code%207.14%20F...
Obviously in violation of the 1st amendment.
Looks like one hell of a lawsuit in the making!
I am somewhat astonished that they would *ever* have thought that section would be constitutional. It would seem being unjustifiably overbroad would be obvious.
(Nice catch BTW)
Somebody posted it in the FlyerTalk forums, so I went looking and found the code on the SDCRAA website.
FlyerTalk is in a blinding rage over this new TSA stuff. Makes for some great reading.
Given a little power they tend to NOT CARE whether it is Constitutional, they write the rule then enforce it and then act surprised and indignant when the sheeple question their rules.. It usually takes getting their ass handed to them in court to change it..
A 2 second read of that rule is pretty clearly not gotta a chance to stand up in court. Commercial photography maybe but nothing else..
Another thought:
What would you care to bet this code is virtually never enforced against people taking pictures of each other in the airport (i.e. friends & family arriving and going away photos) and only gets applied when The Authorities are the subjects?
(a) is flat out illegal. (b) is reasonable, but kind of pointless.
This new TSA gropefest doesn't seem sustainable.
All part of the campaign to make flying miserable.
The underwear and Xmas bombers departed
from other countries, so harassing 50 million
domestic fliers a year
is ridiculous and pointless.
I wonder if these are just excuses to steal iPhones and then take them home for personal use.
Well, someone got through (nearly) naked with video:
http://www.tinynibbles.com/blogarchives/2010/11/going-commando-on-the-ts...
Link not even remotely SFW, but then you can probably guess that.
Post new comment