Originally Posted by
gsoltso
The changes to powders had to do with the fact that it was a security hole that was in the system. Powdered substances weren't checked regularly and it is a threat that has gained more popularity among nefarious groups. Look at the increase in public information on powdered substances and their abilities and a change to policy was a no brainer. By nature, certain types of powders can be an essential part of WEI, and therefore should be screened.
TSA publicizes the "Big Catches" because of the following reasons:
1) The items found are illegal
2) The people caught with these items are doing something illegal
3) It shows the agency is not sitting on it's laurels, and they are actually screening the people coming into the checkpoints
It is an easy way to let the public know that we are not just standing around waving people through and sending them on their way. I don't agree with the rewards thing, as finding WEI and reporting illegal items discovered while doing that is part of the TSO basic job description. Rewards should be given to people that find a more efficient way to work the processes and procedures, or that correct an ongoing safety issue, or do something outside of the normal scope of their job.
I don't just state that the TSO was wrong in that case, if I am informed enough about the case where any TSO has done something wrong, I state it then. The regulations are quite clear, we are not the DEA, FBI, or LEO of any sort, therefore we are not a part of some huge nationwide dragnet for illegal items. It is clear that we are to screen for WEI, and if something illegal (or suspected of being illegal) is found pursuant to that end, then it is to be reported to LEO - end of TSO job. IF TSOs are doing something else, then they need to be corrected.
I'm terribly confused then, for years and years (up until January this year) the front page of the TSA web site showed how many people were arrested for suspicious behavior that week. Which law is that under USC or CFR or any state that you can be arrested for "suspicious behavior"?
Sort of like your brethren screener in Milwaukee (MKE) who told someone with a Kippy baggie that she disagreed with that 1st amendment of the Constitution does not apply to the checkpoint?
But at least your brethren screener Alvin Crabtree did verify that at least the 2nd amendment is applicable. Now if only other screeners can realize that seizing items from unlocked bags and selling them on eBay is not allowed under the 4th amendment.