Originally Posted by
elgringito
I have already cited that the responibilities of a TSA representative can extend beyond what you state their responsibilities should be limited to.
And you are mistaken. I've already explained why your reliance on TSA's propaganda is misplaced.
We were not there to determine if the only reason for the TSA representatives concern was SOLELY a child crying as you wish to believe or whether there were other indications to raise the level of concern.
Were you there to determine whether the child was carrying weapons, explosives or incendiaries? If not, you exceeded your
legal authority. By the way, unauthorized separation and detention of a child from its parents without parent consent constitutes kidnapping when asportation (moving the child) takes place. Don't blame me -- it's only the law.
It is difficult me to conceive of a TSA representative subjecting themselves to the potential second guessing based SOLELY on a few tears as you would indicate, but then again I am perhaps less skeptical than you.
I see TSOs second-guessing all the time. Regardless, I'll say it one more time:
EVEN IF THE TSO HAS A GOOD FAITH BELIEF THAT A CHILD IS BEING KIDNAPPED OR ABUSED, he lacks ANY legal authority to do anything about it.
By intervening, the TSO assumes the same risks as any citizen, i.e. he'd better be right or he will incur liability.