Originally Posted by
AllieKat
I think that's exactly the assumption, and where better to hide them but ON the child, who is presumably less likely to be searched due to attitudes like this?
Yes, the swab of her bag. Two things:
1. It almost certainly was NOT a false positive. Ion spectrometry machines are actually remarkably accurate and do not tend to false alarm. Saying it was a false positive is misleading. Now, what was it positive for? They don't say. Is there a legitimate explanation for the positive reading? Almost certainly. But a false positive - nope, no way. Here's an example to put it into a better light - much currency will test positive for cocaine and other drugs. Does that mean those positives are false? NO - the currency was exposed to them. Likely, the child and/or her bags were exposed to explosives in a legal setting. Regardless, with evidence of explosives, they need to determine there are none on her.
You type a good talk; but there are serious flaws with your post.
You haven't traversed airports much have you? Many of us have heard or been told "Did you put lotion on today" following a "positive" alarm from an ETD swiping. Or how about an elderly person who takes nitrate pills? I have been told "the machine test for chemicals found in explosives". How many chemicals are found in exosives? How many of those chemicals are everyday chemicals?.
Do you know that you can not bring more than 3.4oz of hydrogen peroxide based contact cleaner on a plane? It is not an explosive, but hydrogen peroxide is a chemical found in certain explosives.
read this GOA report, which covers "
false alarm" rates of morpho etd machines