Originally Posted by
RichardKenner
As I understand it, the premise of this program is that people have certain things they do (sometimes called "tells") that show that a certain kind of deception may be occuring. Is that correct?
From tsa.gov:
TSA's BDO-trained security officers are screening travelers for involuntary physical and physiological reactions that people exhibit in response to a fear of being discovered.
http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/bdo/index.shtm
Some people refer to these behaviors as "tells" because it seems to be better understood by the general public. It's not an exact analog.
Your statement is close to correct. The difference is that the behaviors BDOs look for are related to "fear of being discovered," not necessarily just "deception."
Originally Posted by
RichardKenner
Then we're told that these things are involuntary and people cannot stop doing them. Is that correct?
Correct.
Originally Posted by
RichardKenner
If so, then why is a description of such things SSI? As I understand SSI, it relates to information that can be used to subvert security systems. But if this is involuntary, then knowing about them can't stop them. Right?
But if that's true, then how is the information legally SSI?
The tricky part is that the SSI regulation doesn't actually say that it relates only to info that can be used to subvert security systems. I'm guessing, but I think this is the relevant part:
(i) Any procedures, including selection criteria and any comments, instructions, and implementing guidance pertaining thereto, for screening of persons, accessible property, checked baggage, U.S. mail, stores, and cargo, that is conducted by the Federal government or any other authorized person.
(ii) Information and sources of information used by a passenger or property screening program or system, including an automated screening system.
49 CFR 1520.5(b)(9)(i) and 49 CFR 1520.5(b)(9)(ii)
Of course, the stated purpose of the SSI regulation is to prohibit the release of info that could be used to subvert security.
Originally Posted by
PTravel
As a reminder, no one is under any obligation to speak with a BDO, nor does a BDO have any legal authority to arrest or detain. Once you're in the sterile area, i.e. you've submitted to and passed screening, the BDO can not remove you.
If you have any problems with a BDO or anyone other TSA employee, immediately demand to speak with the GSC.
Be careful with this one. First, you do have to pass through screening at the checkpoint. If you exit the checkpoint into the sterile area before TSA personnel (BDO or not) complete your screening, bad things will likely happen to you.
Second, TSA considers gate screenings to be part of their screening operations. If you refuse gate screening, you are refusing TSA screening procedures. This may make for an interesting test case one day, but it may also cause problems for your immediate flight plans.
http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/..._at_gates.shtm
Originally Posted by
Good Guy
I'm not saying it's much more, but the training is longer than two days. Also, a lot of the BDO's I know are retired cops. FYI.
Those selected for the Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques program undergo four days of classroom instruction in behavior observation and analysis, and 24 hours of on-the-job training in an airport security checkpoint environment.
http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/..._bdo_spot.shtm
Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
What does ones past career have to do with being a BDO?
Prior knowledge and experience in the field tend to make one a better BDO, and allow one to pick up on the specifics of the program more quickly.
Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
Isn't it the specific training that you receive that supposedly enables you to pick up on these unconscious signals?
Based on what has been disclosed on PV with training even a rock could do what BDO's do.
I can't find a source for statistics at the moment. The BDO selection process and training class both have significant washout rates. So, no, it is not something that "even a rock could do"
Also, what items on PV led you to this conclusion? I don't always agree with what they post, but I don't recall anything that would lead a reasonable person to this conclusion.