ExpressJet Pilot Just Says No To Full-Body Scan Or Pat-Down

A pilot of Continental’s ExpressJet line has stirred up a ruckus after refusing to submit to either a full-body scan or the alternative, a hands-on pat-down from a TSA screener.

The pilot was making his way through the security checkpoint at Memphis International Airport when he was selected to go through the full-body scanner. When he refused both the scan and the pat-down, he had no choice but to exit the airport without getting on the plane/

Says the pilot to the Memphis Commercial Appeal:

I’m not trying to throw down the gauntlet with the federal government per se… I just want to be able to go to work and not be harassed or molested without cause.

I just kind of had to ask myself ‘Where do I stand?’ I’m just not comfortable being physically manhandled by a federal security agent every time I go to work…

I have those (security) concerns as well, but I don’t believe this approach is a necessary or effective way to mitigate the threat.

The TSA would only confirm to the paper that there was a person at the Memphis airport who refused the scanner, but would not say it was the ExpressJet pilot.

Pilot who refused body scan at Memphis International blasts TSA security []

Thanks to Sara for the tip!


Edit Your Comment

  1. full.tang.halo says:

    Security Theater at it’s finest.

    Psst… if he wanted to do something, he doesn’t need a weapon to rush the cockpit he’s already in it. Never mind the fact he’s the guy steering the thing that can be turned into a improvised missile.

    • Mr_Human says:

      Unless he was impersonating a pilot. It is a possible scenario. I know people like to throw around the “Security Theater” term, but I wonder if does work as a deterrent, at least a little.

      • grumpskeez says:

        Is that a never mind to the possibility that if he was impersonating a pilot he would probably have just submitted to the scan or pat down and then taken control of the plane turning it into the previously mentioned improvised missile?

        How does a scan or pat down stop an impersonator with no weapons?

        Just for you: Security Theater.

      • Shadowfax says:

        Oh yes, and as long as it deters one guy who thinks he might wanna be a terrist from getting on an airplane, it doesn’t matter how much we violate your rights, correct, Good Citizen?

        Hint for you: A real terrorist won’t give a damn about these security measures. The full body scans can’t detect . . ahem. . internal weapons whereas the older and less revealing technology can. So now that we’ve given the terrists the option of concealing a weapon in the anal or vaginal cavity – an option they didn’t have before, they’re now *more* likely to be able to successfully hijack a plane. So not only are the pornoscanners more invasive, but they’re less effective.

        Still think it’s a good deterrent?

        • NewGrace says:

          You cant really argue that they are “more” likely to hijack a plane. Before, they could have ceramic blades, chemical weapons, and any other number of things hidden on their body that would help them assault the plane. We just shifted the manner that we look at the person. Sure, it doesnt catch everything, no security method will.

          Dont get me wrong, im not a fan of them either. I think we have gone way overboard and expect the airline/government to keep us safe a bit to much.

          But, as long as we go down this road, can someone please try a shirt/bra bomb. Lets get those banned next. I vote for safety, we all ride on the plane nude.

          • Shadowfax says:

            The old technology included chemical sniffers and Xrays in addition to magnetic detection. So the ceramic knife and the gas bomb would have been found.

            The new technology can detect anything you try to get on the plane, as long as it’s on the outside of your skin. Stuff it in a body orifice and it can’t see it, whether it’s a knife of any material, a bomb, or even one of these little toys:


            A nice little single-shot gun that can fit just about anywhere, but would be detected with the old scanners no matter how deeply you inserted it.

            • GrimJack says:

              I don’t ever recall being X-Rayed while going through security. My carry-on bag, shoes, and laptop maybe, but not my person. So how would the ‘old ways’ have deterred me from carrying a ceramic knife with me through security?

          • OnePumpChump says:

            You can still hide them anywhere you like if they are shaped to look like parts of innocuous objects. A knife could be disguised as part of the heel of a boot, or one of those metal pieces in the soles of some shoes. Belt buckles have potential, too.

            And artificial limbs, too. (Ever see “Darkman?”)

            • Shadowfax says:

              Well, really, if I’m sitting next to you on an airplane, and I want to kill you, I don’t need an actual knife to do it with. A pencil jabbed into the right area will do the job just fine.

              The uncomfortable fact is, if someone wants to do something badly enough there’s not a lot we can do to stop them. There are lots of everyday objects that can be used as very effective weapons.

              And that’s assuming this shadowy terrist organization doesn’t have someone working on the inside in maintenance or on the cleaning crew who can hide a weapon on the plane for you.

          • squirrel says:

            Re: Shirt/Bra bomb

            The whole time the underwear bomber thing was going on, I laughed and knew this wasn’t really an attempt to bring down a plane, but an attempt to get the TSA/Homeland Security to overreact and require stripsearches at airports. Not too far a stretch after the shoe and liquid thing.

    • dorianh49 says:

      Or he could be a drug mule…

      • ecwis says:

        The TSA is NOT responsible for enforcement of drug laws!

        • kabamm says:

          Heh. Go ahead, carry drugs through a TSA checkpoint. Ha. I didn’t think so.

          • Conformist138 says:

            They will stop you if they find them, duh. But, it’s not their job to be drug sniffers, so the excuse of “we need to find if you’re carrying drugs” isn’t acceptable. They are *supposed* to be checking to make sure no one takes down or hijacks a plane, not enforce any other law they can think of to gain more control.

            Think of it this way: I work security for a large office building. A key aspect of my job is making sure no unauthorized persons enter the building (and to escort them out if they do come in). Now, if you worked here and one day I told you it was a new rule that you, as an authorized employee, had to remove your shoes and empty your pockets, you’d probably get annoyed. After all, my only job is to keep some people out while letting others in. But, you might comply on the grounds that it’s making you safer (even though it’s not). Later on, I up the ante and tell you I either must grope you or inspect a digital image that shows off your bits and pieces. At this point, I bet anything you’d get pissed. If I said “You might be carrying drugs into the building”, you’d be pretty accurate to tell me that inspecting you for the possibility that you might maybe commit a crime cuz, you know, it could happen is not my job.

            My building *could* be blown up or lit on fire; people could be doing illegal things of all variety in their offices. However, at the end of the day, my job is not to be the lord and master of the building, my job is to turn away the bums and let you get on with your day. So far, assuming the employees aren’t going to kill us all at any moment hasn’t resulted in any carnage.

            • buckeyegoose says:

              the point no one brings up is that often times pilots can bypass security at least at my airpork KCMH, as there are doors to get into the “restricted area” down in baggage claim. Whats to stop an employee from just going that route. I dont know what if any checks they get behind those areas…..i dont have the fancy door card to look and find out.

    • full.tang.halo says:
      • buckeyegoose says:

        Sadly, I’ve often conteplated the cost/benefit of saying exactly that, or also pull out my copy of their manual and satating policy to them that they are acting in contrevention to.

  2. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:


    Show your receipt.

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      /sarcasm y’all.

      I find it pretty unprofessional to him to do that. A passenger is one thing, but this is his job. If he doesn’t like it, get in line with the rest of us.

      • Murph1908 says:

        But a passenger making this statement holds no weight. They just don’t get to board the flight they paid for.

        I am thrilled that a pilot did this. It makes a statement 1000x larger than you or I could have.

        • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

          I agree it holds more weight, but doubling the weight of a feather does nothing.

          Now if we start seeing some pilot strikes, THEN something might actually happen.

          • Murph1908 says:

            It’s gotta start somewhere.

            I betcha there’s going to be some airline guys and some union guys in a room sometime this week talking about what kind of discipline is due. Had a passenger done this, we wouldn’t even have heard about it.

            • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

              I think at best it would make life better for pilots only.

              • The cake is a lie! says:

                And their $400,000/yr salary union asses really need a better life….

                • Bye says:

                  Don’t be so jealous that you made a bad choice career-wise.

                • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

                  Citation? I think I’ve read a few articles about pilots having pretty shitty jobs as they start out. It takes a long career to have a “cushy” job. I doubt many get past the “wealthy cap” of $250,000.

                  • AlxFherMana says:

                    I’ve also read many articles about pilots who, when they start out, qualify for food stamps. I’ve actually never heard of pilots who make $400k/yr, but maybe I haven’t been reading enough.

                • Conformist138 says:


                  Ok, I’m… HAHAHAHA!!!! *choke* ugh, inhaled spit.

                  *phew* alright… seriously… if you’ve got a decade or more on the job and you’re the captain of the largest plane of a major commercial airliner (so, the highest paid position), you’re probably looking at up to $15,000/mo. Sounds great, but that math only works out to $180,000/yr. Using a tax rate of 30% (cuz, you know, why not), that gives you a net income of $126,000.

                  If you’re new and a co-pilot or first officer, you can expect a fraction of that pay. If you fly for a regional airline, you do an impressive sounding job for the pay of about 1.5 fast food burger-flippers (ie,

                  (just google “salary commercial airline pilot”)

        • Alvis says:

          Carries no weight, holds no water.

    • Mr.DuckSauce says:

      Hell no!

      A joking response but this video will make my point at the beginning. It’s nsfw.

  3. Bystander says:

    The Revolution begins with one man.The Storm cometh.

    • daemonaquila says:

      I wish. However, while a pissed off flight attendant gets hero/celeb status for popping a chute and screwing up the flight of a planeload of passengers, this guy is going to be reviled by the media and lots of whiners.

      • eturowski says:

        Yeah… Steven Slater ended up being a hero, all right… with a felony conviction.

        I’ll take the media hating me over that any day.

  4. Running_Fool says:

    There is a thread on FlyerTalk with the account of the pilot. It is located in the Travel Security section.
    Seriously though. He’s already in the cockpit, he can’t exactly hijack the plane, he’s already in control!

  5. fsnuffer says:

    I hope they don’t ask to see his receipt at Wal-Mart

  6. Blueskylaw says:

    If pilots get harassed, molested and physically manhandled without cause, what do you think us commoners have to go through?

  7. The cake is a lie! says:

    Now he knows how I feel every time I need to go to the bank. I’m a member of the Delta Community Credit Union and the only branch in town is BEHIND security at the airport. I can use all sorts of satellite locations that do multiple credit union business, but when I want a loan or to pay off a loan, I have to go through security at the airport. There have been times I’ve even needed to BUY a ticket and then have it refunded after I get through security.

    • kc2idf says:

      I think you need to find a different bank, and to tell your current one why.

      • The cake is a lie! says:

        I would, but it isn’t really that big of a pain. Maybe once every five years it is a pain, but not big enough to leave the CU I’ve been with for 15 years. The service I get when I go to the branch makes the trouble worth it. I always feel like I’m the first person they have helped that day regardless of what time of day it is.

        It used to be much easier to get through when I was an airline employee, but now I don’t have an ID I can flash at security to get through without a ticket. Normally I can get a pass at the ticket counter after they call up to the CU to verify I am a member, but there have been times where idiots refuse to realize there is a bank up there and no other way to get to it unless they give me a pass or unless I buy a ticket. So I just buy a first class ticket so I can go through the express lane and it saves me time. It is pretty ridiculous to have to float a few hundred bucks just because I want to pay off a loan though…. That is more of an airline and airport problem than one with my CU. Like I said, the service makes the trouble worth it.

    • LuckyLady says:

      Find a Credit Union Service Center and you won’t have to do this.

      • The cake is a lie! says:

        That is what I use 99% of the time. However, if you need to open an account, get a loan, pay off a loan, or anything like that, then you have to go to the physical branch and not a service center.Like I said, it doesn’t come up that often, but the two or three times I’ve had to go to the airport specifically to go to the bank, it has been a pain.

    • TasteyCat says:

      My local credit union approved my car loan by fax/phone. I have never set foot in any of their offices.

      I assume national credit unions such as Penfed and Alliant would be just as easy to work with.

  8. nbs2 says:

    I, for one, salute this man.

  9. marlathetourist says:

    Finally! Thank you good sir for standing up to this. I have refused to fly ever since I was molested in Austin, TX by a TSA. Open palm grabbing my breasts is not the “proper” security pat down.

    • PupJet says:

      Uhh…unless you want them fisting your breasts, have you thought of *gasp* asking for a female TSA to do the pat-down or is it that you secretly like it?

      • marlathetourist says:

        It was a woman who did the pat down. Which made it all the more awkward. They are supposed to use the back of their hands and feel the bra wire. Not open palm grab the breast. I was half expecting the TSA agent to say “honk, honk” while she did it.

        • Absinthe says:


          Not to belittle what you went through… nobody should be groped… but:

          I just had a vision of a line of women being *honk honked* by TSA agents in clown uniforms with Pee-Wee voices.

  10. Alvis says:

    This doesn’t necessarily have to do with terrorism/safety. We need to search pilots and plane crew to keep them from things like smuggling.

    • kc2idf says:

      Then they should say so and quit blabbing about terrorists.

    • Hoss says:

      Then I wonder if Fedex pilots are searched?

    • c!tizen says:

      or, you know, we could go the whole “constitutional” route and not search without due cause… just sayin’.

      • Gulliver says:

        I missed the part in the constitution that said you had the right to board an airplane. When you show me that amendment I can accept your position. This is the same argument drunk drivers make about taking a breathalyzer. Nobody forces you to do it, unless of course you want a license. There are certain things that people do that if they want to continue to do them, they give up some of their rights. NOBODY is forced to fly.

        • SonicPhoenix says:

          I missed the part where it says you could walk down the street unmolested too. Then again, maybe the absence of an explicily granted freedom in the constitution does not mean that the government has constitutional authority to remove said freedom.

        • LandruBek says:

          If you’re referring to drunk driver checkpoints, where they stop everyone to try to catch DUIs, those too are an unconstitutional crock IMO. If you’re referring to police pulling over someone driving erratically and making them breathe into a machine, that’s a different story — in that case the officer has reasonable suspicion; but it has no bearing on a pilot unless there was reasonable suspicion he was going to hijack the flight.

          It gets harder to argue that no one has to fly when flying is one of the very few ways to travel any significant distance in this country, especially if you live in Hawai’i or Puerto Rico. This isn’t the eighteenth century anymore: people need to get from state to state nowadays, and we shouldn’t have to give up our privacy to do so.

        • c!tizen says:

          I was going to set you straight here, but it looks like I’ve been beaten to it.

        • Pax says:
        • 99 1/2 Days says:

          The constitution does not grant you rights.

    • Pax says:


      If I wanted to smuggle something, I’d ship it via UPS or FedEx, and it’d never face the level of scrutiny a pilot has to, to get through that TSA checkpoint.

    • arcticJKL says:

      TSA is not allowed to check for smuggling, unless it is smuggling a prohibited item like a bomb or a knife.

  11. Hoss says:

    I see his point. A passenger w a box cutter potentially attacks a pilot. But a pilot with a box cutter attacks whom?

    If our pilot is angry at the world, (s)he can take us down without any help!

  12. blanddragon says:

    After the guys that missed the airport by 120 miles last year, Mr Pilot, you and your ilk need a sobriety test too.

    If pilots behaved more like ‘people going to work’ rather that old fighter pilots I would have more sympathy.
    If you’re going to fly me Mr Pilot you need a pat down. and a piss test or you need to get another job.

    • c!tizen says:

      or you need to find another mode of transportation.

    • Snowball2 says:

      So you wouldn’t mind a breathalyzer attached to your car so you can be tested every time you get behind the wheel? After all, auto accidents far outweigh the number of incidents in the air.

    • mmmsoap says:

      I go to work every day, yet I haven’t been patted down once. If you’re concerned about him flying while intoxicated, what exactly does a pat-down accomplish? Are you saying that you are concerned that pilots are bringing alcohol (already on the plane) and/or drugs on board and consuming them during the flight?

      As a teacher, I’m fully aware that there are sick and disturbed individuals who have used teaching positions to harm children. That doesn’t mean I, or even most, or even any significant number of teachers do the same thing.

      • Gulliver says:

        BUT, I bet you submitted to a background check before being allowed to teach. If you were a pedophile wouldn’t that “giving up your right to privacy” be something that SHOULD be done. Or are you pro-child rapists as teachers?

        • Zowzers says:

          That’s an irrelevant conclusion as getting one background check to get a job is not the same level of intrusion on a person as being searched on a daily basis.

    • dolemite says:

      Err…if he wanted to kill you, he would just crash the plane into a mountain. What’s he going to do if he snuck a gun/knife onto a plane? Hold the co-pilot hostage and tell himself to fly himself to Cuba?

      This is Bureaucracy at it’s best, and he is right? Would you like to have some mouth breather patting you down every day you went to work? Or taking naked pictures of you? People that you work with on a daily basis?

      • Bill610 says:

        From what I understand, under current law all he has to do to bring a gun onto the plane is be certified through the Flight Deck Officer program:

        “Pilots must volunteer, take a psychological test and complete a weeklong firearms training program run by the government to keep a gun in the cockpit.”

  13. william says:

    I am Canadian, and haven’t fly to US ever since TSA appeared. I just couldn’t bother with it. There are many other countries in the world that didn’t need to humiliate a spending customer/tourist in order to create a false sense of security.

    • blanddragon says:

      Canada and security is an oxymoron man. Just so you know :-)

    • Michaela says:

      I guess you don’t fly many places then. My bags were searched in Spain and I had to be interviewed before boarding a plane in Amsterdam. My mother used to always have issues with flying in the Middle East and Eastern Euro. Australia felt the need to thoroughly inspect my shoes.

      Annoying security exists across the world.

      • Kitamura says:

        But the US does all that and more. It would be impossible to deny that many countries employ a vast array of different screening techniques and policies, but how much safer is your plane if everyone has to submit to a full body cavity search as opposed to the metal detector?

      • william says:

        I usually fly west, not east, visiting mostly Japan, Korea, China and Taiwan.

    • Danielle74 says:

      I live in Canada and I just returned from a trip where I had to go though security in Detroit, New York City, London and Barcelona. The security process was nearly identical at every airport.

  14. Wang_Chung_Tonight says:

    this man is THE man.

    i wish more people would do this. the things they make us go through in the name of security

  15. 5seconds says:

    Don’t pilots also have a giant axe mounted to the cockpit door? For fires or something? I think that confiscating scissors, but then giving them giant axe might defeat the purpose.

  16. alSeen says:

    The new pat down procedures are because of the underwear bomber.

    Sounds like the guy needs to become an FFDO if he wants to bypass security.

  17. RedOryx says:

    I work in a prison. Part of this job requires having my bags searched as I am coming and leaving the institution, as well as having to go through a metal detector. They also sometimes do random pat downs of all staff.

    I could get offended and mad that my employer is essentially saying all of us staff members are security risks and don’t trust us and blah blah, but it’s part of the job description, which is sort of how I view this, too. It’s not necessarily about stopping terrorists, but to make sure pilots and flight crew members aren’t bringing things aboard they shouldn’t be. Just comes with the territory.

    • cluberti says:

      You can’t very well crash the prison into the ground and kill 300 people either with nothing but your hands. This guy already has that ability, so trying to frisk him to make sure he’s not bringing something onboard to try and hijack … himself … seems silly. I understand security at the prison with *known* felons serving their time, but this is a pilot at an airport who could bring down the plane without bringing anything onboard.

    • Bill610 says:

      But TSA’s ONLY mission is stopping terrorists. They were not created to, nor do they have authority to, enforce other laws. That is why, if they find something otherwise illegal, incidental to one of their searches, they need to bring in other law enforcement agencies. So if searching pilots serves more to address other crime, such as smuggling, then it is not within TSA’s jurisdiction.

  18. Dr. Eirik says:

    Yes, because it’s never happened that an airline employee has skipped past screening to smuggle a weapon on board.

    Or that a pilot used weapons to try and take over and control a plane to use as a missile.

    Naturally, a pilot in control could down a craft if he’s alone in the cockpit.

    But he’d have to be alone in the cockpit to do it.

    You can’t stop everything, but we’ve been down this road before. Subjecting the pilots to a security check that every other passenger is going though is not a big hardship.

    • zach says:

      What?? Bad things happen everyday, in your country, state, city and neighborhood. Should we have the TSA monitor every corner, parking-lot, church, etc. for you false sense of security. Of course it has happened in the past, it will happen again in the future, bad stuff happens… grow up, accept reality, go live your life and get out of my way!

    • ecwis says:

      IIRC, the FedEx hijacker was a flight engineer, not a pilot.

    • TasteyCat says:

      It’s a plane. A PLANE. The thing weighs 50 tons and travels at 500 miles per hour. It would be very easy to turn into a weapon, boxcutters or no.

    • LandruBek says:

      I don’t care about any of those things. Privacy is an essential characteristic of a free society and we’re stupidly squandering the privacy of millions in hopes of preventing a vanishingly rare kind of crime. The pilot is right.

    • roothorick says:

      1. Fired airline employee; wasn’t a pilot
      2. Not THE pilot; blunt weapon. Letting the pilot have weapons would actually be advantageous in that situation.
      And #3 only proves our point. A pilot doesn’t need a weapon to kill everyone onboard; all he needs to do is push down on that steering wheel and hold it there for a while.

      So wait, what was your point, exactly?

  19. NewGrace says:

    As someone already pointed out, pilots and aircrew can get involved in smuggling. Also, pilot brings his bowie knife on board, leaves it in the bathroom, and little susie goes on a rampage because her favorite “My Little Pony” was thrown in the trash at security.

    But on a serious note. Im glad he disagrees with it, but it seems kind of a tasteless time to “protest” in such a low impact way.

    Great, he missed the flight, the flight gets cancelled, and the hundreds of other pilots will still do their job. He should of coordinated with his union and gotten a strike going… one man protesting at his workplace just results in one man finding a new job.

    • ecwis says:

      The TSA is not in the business of preventing smuggling! They are responsible for securing the planes. ICE, CBP and the DEA are responsible for smuggling/drug enforcement.

    • hotcocoa says:

      Since when do pilots use the same bathroom as passengers?

      • jesirose says:

        there’s another bathroom on the plane? Where?

        • hotcocoa says:

          I’ve never seen any of the crew use the same bathrooms that I have access to on a flight. And I usually fly non-stop to China.
          Have you ever seen a pilot come down the aisle to use the bathroom? I’m guessing the pilots have their own bathrooms closer to the cockpit.

  20. Sheogorath says:

    What happens when the majority of pilots refuse this sort of treatment?
    It’s not like you can bring in strikebusters for the Pilots Union.

    • RandomHookup says:

      Retired pilots. Though they’ll miss an occasional airport because of napping.

    • Brunette Bookworm says:

      Eh, Reagn busted the air traffic controllers strike, why couldn’t the pilots have strike busted too? I’m sure there are trained pilots who aren’t working who would do it.

  21. Mike says:

    To be honest using the kind of screening is lame and I am glad when anyone protests it. Time and again we see stories of undercover TSA agents getting past security with fake bombs all the time, and those are just the rare instances we hear about, they do this kind of screening all the time and from the few comments I have read from TSA employees, their success rate is not all that high at catching the fake terrorists.

    Screening at airports is about as effective at preventing terrorism as giving everyone bullet proof vests to reduce gun deaths. But keep on screening people, if that what makes you feel safe.

    P.S. The terrorists won, we are all acting like terrified idiots.

  22. truthandjustice says:

    Here’s a better, on-the-spot, truly secure approach. Forget about the scanners, patdowns, etc.. Let’s have detonator booths wherein EVERYONE has to go into the booth, one-by-one. Security then closes the door and activates the booth that will set off any and all explosives on the person inside.

    NO explosives on your person — you’re good to go. Proceed to your airplane.
    Explosives on your person — you’re blown up on the spot — and no longer a threat to law-abiding human beings. Next problem to solve . . . .

  23. Not Given says:

    Did anyone miss the fact that pilots can now bring a gun into the cockpit? There is a training course they take for that. My cousin is a pilot and does, in fact, carry a gun into the cockpit.

  24. Bitingback says:

    A better take on this entire story is to read the forum where the pilot originally posted his grievance. And way to suck Consumerist for not having posted it in the first place.

  25. Branden says:

    what’s the worst that could happen if a pilot snuck nail clippers on a plane? take control of it?

  26. Sarcastico says:

    Lovin’ it.

  27. ElizabethD says:

    Podracer Anakin FTW

  28. donovanr says:

    Hero! Maybe this will be the court case that finally restores the 4th amendment.

  29. FrankReality says:

    The TSA is damned near useless, totally incompetent and gives a FALSE sense of security while stealing personal liberty (and in the other post) personal property.

    You want to get serious about terrorism – do what the Israelis do. You don’t see THEM frisking 80 year old grandmothers.

  30. physics2010 says:

    He could easily kill everyone without even crashing the plane. He could do so in the pressence of the co-pilot, with the co-pilot noticing. He’d just depressurize the passenger cabin and wait for you all to die. Even if the oxygen masks deployed, which is doubtful without a rapid pressure changes, they are only good for 15 minutes.

  31. cjnewbs says:

    Wasn’t there a law that stated that pilots in the us were permitted to take a handgun on board. In which case that makes the pat-down somewhat redundant.