That's exactly his biggest issue with the whole thing. He works in a very high target location and he would be fired/sued for doing what TSOs do and yet they get away with it. He was careful when stating that he was LEO to say "I am aware of pat down procedure" and not "I'm aware and approve of your pat down procedure." He also has a hunch that he got a very light and quick pat down because the TSO was afraid of performing a pat down to the level that he knew was excessive and not what you would ever be trained to do outside of TSA.

The issue I have with the argument that people see complying as the lesser of two evils is, why would anyone blindly go into something they don't fully understand? If one doesn't fully understand what the scanners do, what radiation levels they emit, what tests have been done, etc, I would think self preservation would kick in and you would at least ask a question about it since there were no signs about what the machine was and what it did. I doubt it's the only checkpoint the lack of signage is an issue. It's kind of like being led blindly off a cliff and never stopping to ask why you aren't stopping at the edge. I find that idea disturbing, but maybe I'm just hyper aware and research everything.

If TSA means that appropriate signage is "TSA enhanced procedures in use at this checkpoint" I don't think the word appropriate means what they think it means. I'd say 60% (at least) of travelers, especially those who were going through CRP this morning would have no clue what that means. The vast majority of them were old or families going on cruises/international vacations so most likely not seasoned travelers.