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.
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.
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.
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?
Programs: Delta Diamond, PC Plat, Hilton Diamond, Avis Chairman
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by SATTSO
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?
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.
Programs: Delta Diamond, PC Plat, Hilton Diamond, Avis Chairman
Posts: 583
Quote:
Originally Posted by SATTSO
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
