Originally Posted by
law dawg
Super, I agree with you here, but my question is - what should the TSA do then when they encounter say, a gun? Obviously the pax can't fly with it, but should they then not call the LEOs, since it's only an admin search?
Or what, to use a reducto ad absurdum example, a human head in a carry on? No LEOs? Where is the line drawn, on both sides of the question?
Don't want to hijack this thread too much, I'm just curious as to your take.
The first part I don't have an issue with. TSA is looking for guns and stuff to keep them off of planes and they shouldn't be allowed to fly with that. It's within the scope of their search. I'd be more inclined to send them out of the line to get rid of the weapon and issue a civil fine for the max (I believe $5k) for trying to bring it into a sterile area.
Things like drugs I think should be ignored. I don't think drugs are a good thing, but I think the line needs to be drawn there.
I have a harder time with finding the head, and honestly, I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. I mean, it's likely to be evidence of a murder. On the other hand, there would be a chance with the right lawyer and judge that the evidence could be quashed because it could be argued that the search turned criminal and violated the accused's 4th amendment rights and the guy could walk. So it really seems to me like it's lose/lose either way. It's an ethical conundrum at that point.
As much as I'm loathe to let a murderer walk, at the same time, I really don't want to see that checkpoints are used than other for their intended purpose. I would hope that there would be a way that the criminal erred that they could prove that it was in plain sight and not found due to the administrative search.
Sorry I can't give a better answer to the last part. The constitution was written to prevent innocents from getting put in jail wrongly and I think the founding fathers knew that the price of that would be that some people would walk. There is no easy answer to this.