Originally Posted by TSORon

You first.

The devices detect chemicals, usually in the double digit parts per million. Many household chemicals have their usual run of the mill uses, and those same chemicals can be used for something far more destructive. The presence of these chemicals on an individual’s person or property does not indicate nefarious intent, it only indicates a need for a closer inspection (as we have discussed here many many times).

If our ETD detects “nitroamine”, that does not mean that the individual has built a bomb, it only means that the chemical is present on his person or property. Such a chemical has many legitimate purposes around the globe, but can also be used to build an explosive device. A more intense inspection is warranted. The same can be said for many chemicals, including hydrogen peroxide. I have some in my medical kit at my home, many people do, and its presence is not really unexpected in someone’s personal property. But the only way to determine its concentration is in a lab like facility, which cannot be deployed to every commercial airport in the United States. Its concentration is a major factor when considering its ability to be a component in a bomb.

So, in the end, an ETD alarm is rarely a false negative. It’s an indication that further inspection is warranted. Get it now?



Only if you narrow the definition of "false positive" down to its most basic form. Only the obtuse do that, and then only to try and make a point where there is none.

There are many chemicals in nature that you cannot see, does that make them exist any less?