Originally Posted by
wildcatlh
1. It's questionable whether seeing the powder would = reasonable suspicion. A TSO (or a LEO for that matter) has no training on what drugs "look like". To the trained eye, flour, for example, would never look like drugs.
2. Even if you got past #1, and you wanted to question, it should be a matter of testing the flour, seeing that it's not drugs, and then sending the individual on their way with an apology. Unfortunately field tests are very, very poor (and they more or less will show any substance as testing positive as being anything you want it to test positive for).
Full Disclosure: I'm an advocate for drug legalization. But in the meantime I'm an advocate for federal and local and state agents to follow the Constitution.
This whole discussion has gone way beyond ridiculous. Now some are apparently trying to blame the travelling public for packing items that an untrained flunkie might mistake for drugs. Doing this is "failing to take personal responsibility", yet the TSA isn't expected to be responsible for anything at all, because "they're just doing their jobs," (which apparently is harassing passengers based on simplistic prejudices) nor are law enforcement officers expected to "take personal responsibility" for the results provided by the drug test kits produced by manufacturers eager to cash in on anti-drug hysteria.
It's just another example of how everything has become the exact opposite of what it is supposed to be. Ordinary citizens are now expected to "take personal responsibility" for educating themselves about the ignorant prejudices of law enforcement, but the law enforcement officers who are paid with their taxes are not responsible for their actions. Instead of being willing to sacrifice our lives in order to preserve our freedoms, we are now expected to sacrifice our freedoms in order to save a few lives. The presumption of innocence has transmogrified into the need to satisfy a LEO's suspicions before being permitted to go on our way. A passenger carrying porn can have his stuff seized because "he should know" that the notice on the cover attesting that all models were over 18 at the time of shooting is probably fake. Moving funds from one place to another by private citizens cannot be done in a way that is not "transparent" to the government (and any attempt to do so is inherently suspicious), but government actions are covered by "SSI." Previously, "transparency" was a concept that applied exclusively to how governments conducted themselves, whereas ordinary citizens, operating in what was properly called the "private" sector had no obligation to reveal anything to anybody.