Originally Posted by
yyzvoyageur
Having said that, I think there is a huge difference between the TSA finding cocaine in the course of a bag check and the police setting up random checkpoints on the streets.
Of course there is. I'm not comparing them. Consider, though, that TSA doesn't know it has found cocaine in the course of a bag check unless it stops searching for dangerous items and tests whatever substance is suspected of being cocaine. The alternative is to give the subject of search the benefit of the doubt when something is found that is clearly not a weapon, explosive, or incendiary.
I have recently suggested that they give such benefit of the doubt:
When you are conducting warrantless searches of us, when you see something in our belongings that catches your attention, unless that item is a weapon, explosive, or incendiary, it's none of your business. If you see a pipe, assume it is free of residue of illegal substances and intended for use with legal substances. If you see some porn, assume that it contains people of legal age. If you see a pet, assume that it is licensed and has had its rabies shots. If you see some cash, assume that it belongs to the person holding it. If you see an digital music player, assume that the person holding it had permission to copy the data it contains onto it. If you see some papers, assume that they are not secret plans for world domination. If you see someone with brown skin, assume that he has a right to be where he is.
Originally Posted by
yyzvoyageur
The cocaine that's found by the TSA is found by happenstance. It's like a police officer who pulls someone over for speeding.
Not really. Setting aside the fact that TSA doesn't know they have found cocaine until they have stopped searching to test whatever they found:
In the case of a car that is exceeding the legal speed limit, a police officer -- someone trained to enforce the law for us in a constitutional manner -- stops someone because he has observed wrongdoing, and we have granted no special exemption to the normal protections against abuse of power that exist. In the case of TSA searching people at airports, the search is not performed by a law enforcement officer and those performing the search have no reason to believe the subject of the search has done anything wrong. Under other circumstances it would be illegal for TSA to conduct such a search, but we have granted a special exemption because we are so concerned about the possibility of dangerous items being carried onto airplanes.
Originally Posted by
yyzvoyageur
He looks in the car and notices drugs in the ashtray. The drugs were found in the course of his other duties and not as part of some dragnet.
Sure. A dragnet would be the police officer stopping everyone who passes and searching them without reason to suspect wrongdoing. An underhanded dragnet like the TSA conducts would happen if we allowed the police to stop everyone to prevent dangerous items from being carried onto our highways, then they began to use the search to look for anything they want. See the difference?
Originally Posted by
yyzvoyageur
I do think there should be some limits on what the TSA reports to police. A number of unpaid parking tickets or copied DVDs is very minor. A rational person, though, would have no problem with the TSA reporting a brick of suspected cocaine or a stack of child pornography to the local police.
Those aren't minor to local parking enforcement or to the Motion Picture Association of America. Regardless, in this discussion, people have expressed the belief that TSA have a duty to report to law enforcement any indications of wrongdoing that turn up in a search.
Originally Posted by
HSVTSO Dean
It should also be noted that TSA is not required to report all instances of wrong-doing. It's not a blanket rule of 'reporting contraband.'
SgtScott31
wrote:
By policy, [a TSA luggage inspector] is supposed to report suspicious items discovered during an administrative (and consensual) search.
Originally Posted by
HSVTSO Dean
I've seen maybe a hundred or so pirated DVDs in my six years
First of all, let's not use the term "pirated" unless we're talking about someone who forcibly boards a ship and steals a shipment of DVDs. There's no plundering going on when someone copies information without permission. Use of the term "pirate" to refer to someone who copies information without permission of the copyright holder is pushed upon us by those who profit from restricting the copying of information and have a vested interest in elevating our perception of the wrongness of the act.
But whatever we call copyright infringement, unless you investigated thoroughly, you cannot know what you claim. You are probably guessing based on the appearance of the discs you saw. Please assume that people prefer not to take their legally-obtained originals with them traveling and have made copies in order to avoid the risk of having their discs stolen or damaged. There's no reason for you to suspect wrongdoing, and it's no more important to airplane security than finding crack pipes, cocaine, stolen credit cards, pornography, unvaccinated pets, or undocumented immigrants.