Originally Posted by josmul123

So, I had a strange experience today at SEA.

I'm pre-check, and I (of course) got "randomly" selected for secondary screening. I opted for a pat-down, and before I could get my shoes, belt, and sweatshirt off, they had a male assist ready to go.

I walk over to the "Freedom HJ station," as I like to call it, spread 'em, and the guy puts my stuff up haphazardly on a table, with my laptop teetering on the edge of the table. I protest his arrangement, telling him my computer was going to fall, and he disregarded it and left it as-is.

Laptop started to tumble, and I lunged forward and narrowly caught it before it hit the ground. I apologized and told him I know I'm not supposed to touch the bags, but this was an extenuating circumstance.

He seemed fine about it (but didn't apologize), completed his process of caressing me all over my body, went over to the machine that tests gloves, swabbed his gloves once, then went off to the right, pulled a *different* swab out of a sealed plastic container, then swabbed his gloves again. he then inserted that second swab into the machine.

I hear him whispering around about calling Seattle PD, he comes up to me and says his glove tested positive for explosive residue.

A second TSA agent comes over and says he's going to conduct a second pat-down. As he does so, first TSA agent takes everything out of my carry-on and swabs it... Puts the swab in a DIFFERENT machine. Stuff comes up negative. Glove on second TSA agent comes out negative, I'm free to go.

I asked the supervisor if the explosive residue detection ever "randomly" comes up with a positive the way the metal detectors "randomly" come up with people to scan for secondary. She said no, but that "many household items can come back as positive" and told me to have a good flight.

Thoughts?

Originally Posted by petaluma1

At least they didn't demand that you off to a private room with them.

Originally Posted by Schmurrr

I encountered that at MCO last week, when the post-patdown ETD test came back positive. The TSA employee said I had to go to the private room for the resolution patdown. I said this had happened to me before in San Diego, where the second patdown was conducted in public because the ETD test machine was malfunctioning. MCO's TSA insisted on the private room. I declined. I eventually collected 4 or 5 TSA staff around me, including the checkpoint supervisor. The supervisor went off to make a call to check and see if it was indeed possible to do the resolution patdown in public; he came back and said it wasn't allowed. We argued* about me having an independent witness, filming the resolution patdown with my camera, etc. A LEO was summoned; he declined to get involved otherwise. After 40 or 45 minutes of this and no success, I said I'd go to the private room but I needed to have at least 2 TSA staff in there as witnesses. They agreed to this.

The resolution patdown was the public patdown repeated but with the front of the hands used across the "groin area." I thought it would be more invasive than that. I couldn't get them to tell me what would happen if the resolution patdown also resulted in an ETD alarm, though.

*All of the TSA staff involved in this were very professional. We argued, but it was very civil. I believe they were sincerely trying to be helpful and reasonable within the constraints of their policies. If they had not been professional and civil, I am quite certain the situation would've escalated in a bad way.

Originally Posted by Schmurrr

*All of the TSA staff involved in this were very professional. We argued, but it was very civil. I believe they were sincerely trying to be helpful and reasonable within the constraints of their policies. If they had not been professional and civil, I am quite certain the situation would've escalated in a bad way.

Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much

I'm not picking on you as an individual but at society that has accepted the TSA version of airport security invasiveness as necessary. I am sorry. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, "professional" about an American, under the color of law, to grope the genitals of another American, for the "privilege" of flying on a commercial airplane from Point A to Point B.

If a TSA clerk did this to me outside of an airport, one of us would be in jail and another one of us would be in the hospital.

Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much

I'm not picking on you as an individual but at society that has accepted the TSA version of airport security invasiveness as necessary. I am sorry. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, "professional" about an American, under the color of law, to grope the genitals of another American, for the "privilege" of flying on a commercial airplane from Point A to Point B.

If a TSA clerk did this to me outside of an airport, one of us would be in jail and another one of us would be in the hospital.

Originally Posted by zitsky

OK, playing devil's advocate I guess. What's to stop someone from smuggling through some non permitted item, illegal drugs by stuffing it into their underwear? I recognize how unpleasant the groin grope is, but either their machine finds an anomaly, or the pax opts out and needs to be checked in some way. I am not saying they should grope people, just asking how we do security successfully? For everyone complaining about TSA and their machines, what is the alternative? Go back to metal detectors everywhere?

Originally Posted by WillCAD

Okay, first of all - TSA is not tasked with, or BY LAW permitted to, search for drugs. Drugs present no danger to the aircraft or the people on it, ZERO, and as such are no business of TSA. It is up to law enforcement to investigate drug crimes, including smuggling, and the fact that you even bring it up in a discussion of airport screening indicates a total misunderstanding on your part of how the Constitution works. Of course, if you're not an American, I can certainly forgive that particular ignorance.

Secondly, your question, "what is the alternative", has been asked and answered hundreds of times on this board. The answer is generally a variation on pre-9/11 security - walk-through metal detectors (WTMD), combined with baggage x-ray, explosive trace detection swabs (ETD) for passengers. No liquids restrictions (they're useless), no undressing, no shoe carnival, no interrogations (name game, etc), and no removal of a person from a plane based solely on another passenger being "uncomfortable" with their ethnic group.

For airport vendors, improved vetting and the same screening as passengers for access to the sterile area. On board the aircraft, secured, reinforced cockpit doors and procedures to prevent a would-be hijacker from accessing the flight deck.

Meanwhile, law enforcement should get on with the job of either arresting or clearing everyone on the no fly list. If they're too dangerous to fly, lock them up, but if they're not dangerous enough - or there is insufficient evidence - to lock them up, then take them off that cursed list and let them live their lives.

But given that you've been on FT since 2008, I'm guessing that you've read all of this stuff already and were being rhetorical when you asked your question.

Originally Posted by tanja

YES What has drugs to with security??? NOTHING.Grow up here.

Originally Posted by zitsky

That's a very adult response.

Originally Posted by zitsky

OK, playing devil's advocate I guess. What's to stop someone from smuggling through some non permitted item, illegal drugs by stuffing it into their underwear? I recognize how unpleasant the groin grope is, but either their machine finds an anomaly, or the pax opts out and needs to be checked in some way. I am not saying they should grope people, just asking how we do security successfully? For everyone complaining about TSA and their machines, what is the alternative? Go back to metal detectors everywhere?

Originally Posted by Boggie Dog

Yes!

Why would TSA search for drugs? You do understand that TSA is only allowed by law to conduct a limited administrative search for Weapons, Incediaries, and Explosives.

Originally Posted by tanja

So what is drugs? The legal or not the "legal". That is legal in a some states. That is so creepy to judge a person on "drugs". I dont take any. So I should would REALLY feel weird if some one travels with them. And I have to judge them?What is the differnce between "legal" and "illegal" drugs? Differnt from one state to another. You can have an "illegal" drug from one state that is Legal and a MD that is not accpeted in another state. WOAH