Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Practical Travel Safety Issues
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 7, 09, 6:59 pm   #166
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: FrostByte Falls, Mn
Programs: Holiday Inn Plat NW gold AA gold
Posts: 2,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trollkiller View Post
Care to expand on this part?
Usually at MSP the checkpoint is noisy with TSOs chatting with each other and the passengers. Not so today. Very quiet. Most of the time both of my bags get torn apart for additional searches. Today, just a quick run through the x-ray machine and off I go. No smiles on any of the TSOs.

Just from past experience, they behaved as though they had all been given a 'serious as a heart attack' speech from management.

Might be wrong, but that was the impression.
__________________
I am not a zek being transported to a gulag. I am an American citizen just traveling.
AngryMiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:05 pm   #167
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmocek View Post
In cases like this, what crime would the police officer be accusing the passenger of having committed were he to arrest as threatened?
It's very rare. Only when the pax has become so disruptive to the screening process and causes a disturbance at the checkpoint. Most often what I have seen, and been a TSO involved in, the pax ask for a STSO, still refuses screening of their property, a LEO is summoned, and the LEO basically says (my words now) screening will continue, TSA will finish their procedures, then you can leave. The LEO stays and watches, but that's about it.
SATTSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:07 pm   #168
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryMiller View Post
Usually at MSP the checkpoint is noisy with TSOs chatting with each other and the passengers. Not so today. Very quiet. Most of the time both of my bags get torn apart for additional searches. Today, just a quick run through the x-ray machine and off I go. No smiles on any of the TSOs.

Just from past experience, they behaved as though they had all been given a 'serious as a heart attack' speech from management.

Might be wrong, but that was the impression.
Wrong impression. I was about the only one at work today who knew about it.
SATTSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:10 pm   #169
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryMiller View Post
Usually at MSP the checkpoint is noisy with TSOs chatting with each other and the passengers. Not so today. Very quiet. Most of the time both of my bags get torn apart for additional searches. Today, just a quick run through the x-ray machine and off I go. No smiles on any of the TSOs.

Just from past experience, they behaved as though they had all been given a 'serious as a heart attack' speech from management.

Might be wrong, but that was the impression.
I wonder if it is related to this document or if someone at MSP screwed up.

Did anyone else that flew today have a similar experience?
__________________
Trollkiller's new home
Trollkiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:13 pm   #170
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MSP
Programs: Delta Diamond, PC Plat, Hilton Diamond, Avis Chairman
Posts: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by SATTSO View Post
It's very rare. Only when the pax has become so disruptive to the screening process and causes a disturbance at the checkpoint. Most often what I have seen, and been a TSO involved in, the pax ask for a STSO, still refuses screening of their property, a LEO is summoned, and the LEO basically says (my words now) screening will continue, TSA will finish their procedures, then you can leave. The LEO stays and watches, but that's about it.
That doesn't answer Phil's question. Also, what if said pax refuses to allow the search to continue?
__________________
My seatback is not a handrail!
bonoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:25 pm   #171
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Colorado
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonoman View Post
That doesn't answer Phil's question. Also, what if said pax refuses to allow the search to continue?
Then he is escorted off the checkpoint as an unwanted party AND/OR the gsc comes down and tells him that he cannot fly.
__________________
Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
eyecue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:27 pm   #172
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonoman View Post
That doesn't answer Phil's question. Also, what if said pax refuses to allow the search to continue?
I did answer phils question. As has been pointed out on this site a thousand times, TSOs are not LEOs. You can rest assured the LEOs do not consult me when on the very few occasions they have had to arrest a pax. But if I had to guess it is what I said: they disrupted the screening process.

As to your second question, I have yet to see anyone refuse the police, and at that point they actually can't refuse. If the police take over and do the search it is no longer a 4th amendment search. At this point I believe the police have probable cause. Just a guess, not a lawyer here, and can only tell you what I have actually seen.
SATTSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:37 pm   #173
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MSP
Programs: Delta Diamond, PC Plat, Hilton Diamond, Avis Chairman
Posts: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by SATTSO View Post
But if I had to guess it is what I said: they disrupted the screening process.
So the LEO would issue a citation for...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SATTSO View Post
If the police take over and do the search it is no longer a 4th amendment search. At this point I believe the police have probable cause.
Probable cause based on what? Just because someone *may* be in possession of something that's not allowed to go on a plane in no way automatically incriminates them of something else. I can walk into a courthouse, forget I have a swiss army knife in my pocket when I walk through the WTMD there and if I pull it out and say I'm going to return this to my car, I'm not arrested or searched further because the deputies want to abuse probable cause.

I'm amazed at how quickly its assumed again that everyone is a criminal.
__________________
My seatback is not a handrail!
bonoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:42 pm   #174
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonoman View Post
So the LEO would issue a citation for...?



Probable cause based on what? Just because someone *may* be in possession of something that's not allowed to go on a plane in no way automatically incriminates them of something else. I can walk into a courthouse, forget I have a swiss army knife in my pocket when I walk through the WTMD there and if I pull it out and say I'm going to return this to my car, I'm not arrested or searched further because the deputies want to abuse probable cause.

I'm amazed at how quickly its assumed again that everyone is a criminal.
No, it is actually a crime to disrupt the screening process. Not my opinion; fact.
SATTSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:44 pm   #175
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by SATTSO View Post
No, it is actually a crime to disrupt the screening process. Not my opinion; fact.
Statute please.
__________________
Trollkiller's new home
Trollkiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:45 pm   #176
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: BOS
Programs: TSA TSO
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonoman View Post
Also, what if said pax refuses to allow the search to continue?
You can't. Screening must be completed no matter what. And it's legal as there was a court case pertaining to this very issue, I just can't remember the parties so I'm searching for it right now.

EDIT: FOUND IT! Gotta love LexisNexis.

United States v. Aukai

Plus some background info:

http://fourthamendment.com/blog/inde...&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Last edited by LoganTSO; Dec 7, 09 at 7:51 pm.. Reason: Yay! Found it!
LoganTSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:47 pm   #177
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: FrostByte Falls, Mn
Programs: Holiday Inn Plat NW gold AA gold
Posts: 2,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SATTSO View Post
No, it is actually a crime to disrupt the screening process. Not my opinion; fact.
Not a crime. Disrupting the screening process is a civil action and you get fined for it.

Straight from one end of the horse and TSA (pdf warning).
__________________
I am not a zek being transported to a gulag. I am an American citizen just traveling.

Last edited by AngryMiller; Dec 7, 09 at 8:02 pm.. Reason: add link
AngryMiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 7:54 pm   #178
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonoman View Post
So the LEO would issue a citation for...?
Disturbing the peace, obstruction of a government employee in their lawful duty, or trespass.

Quote:
Probable cause based on what? Just because someone *may* be in possession of something that's not allowed to go on a plane in no way automatically incriminates them of something else. I can walk into a courthouse, forget I have a swiss army knife in my pocket when I walk through the WTMD there and if I pull it out and say I'm going to return this to my car, I'm not arrested or searched further because the deputies want to abuse probable cause.

I'm amazed at how quickly its assumed again that everyone is a criminal.
Probable cause based on the fact that you halted the administrative screening. The test would be if a reasonable person, based on his knowledge and experience, feels your action indicate a probable crime.
__________________
Trollkiller's new home
Trollkiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 8:07 pm   #179
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing
Posts: 70,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoganTSO View Post
You can't. Screening must be completed no matter what. And it's legal as there was a court case pertaining to this very issue, I just can't remember the parties so I'm searching for it right now.

EDIT: FOUND IT! Gotta love LexisNexis.

United States v. Aukai

Plus some background info:

http://fourthamendment.com/blog/inde...&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
Is the LexisNexis access granted via work, school or just directly paid for by self at retail pricing available to the general public?
__________________
Like TSA, DL SkyMiles management treats airline customers as if they are the enemy or sheep to be fleeced and it shows.
GUWonder is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 09, 8:07 pm   #180
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoganTSO View Post
You can't. Screening must be completed no matter what. And it's legal as there was a court case pertaining to this very issue, I just can't remember the parties so I'm searching for it right now.

EDIT: FOUND IT! Gotta love LexisNexis.

United States v. Aukai

Plus some background info:

http://fourthamendment.com/blog/inde...&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
Screening must be completed as long as it is reasonable. In the Aukai the judges decided that particular screening was reasonable.

Translation: you can't claim that something found after you express the desire to leave in inadmissible due to your consent being revoked.
__________________
Trollkiller's new home
Trollkiller is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:12 am.




SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.