Originally Posted by
sbagdon
It appears to be that the process is... if a non-postive ETD can not occcur, a resolution pat-down must be performed. The issue is, the cause of the lack of a non-postive ETD isn't taken in to consideration. Examples... all the ETD machines are broken, the SOP says to do an ETD, they can't so they have to do the rpd. Or... the ETD fails the control test before testing the pax, they can't do an ETD, so they have to do the rpd.
Incorrect in a subtle but significant way. As written, it suggests that repeating the ETD test and getting a negative will prevent the rpd. As implemented, once they get *any* positive ETD after touching your body/stuff, they insist on performing an rpd, even if they believe the machine is broken.
I think there's even more to it than that. During the extensive bag search after my rpd at PDX, I started trying to root cause the source of the original alarm, and the STSO agreed to ETD a bar of hotel soap in my rollaboard at my request. Before doing so, he *loudly* announced to the other TSOs in the room that this test did not "count." Presumably, if it had "counted" and been "positive," something even more offensive would have happened to me or my stuff. As it was, the test was negative.
Originally Posted by
jphripjah
It surprises me that it seems that a lot of people resist TSA screening and refuse to play the name game, etc. but everyone more or less acts like sheep with CBP and submits to their intensive interrogations.
CBP have guns, actual law enforcement authority, and the ability to detain you, forcibly x-ray you, and force laxatives into you. And as with most law enforcement, they likely will suffer few if any consequences for abusing those powers.
The worst TSA can do to you is make you miss your flight and threaten you with a civil fine that is apparently quite rarely imposed.