Originally Posted by
oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Bocastephen,
What you said is true.
Wow. Thought so, but nice to see this confirmed by a TSO. Thank-you. And IMHO that makes Aukai a totally impractical, muddled sham ruling that concludes no ability to terminate an administrative search should be given because terrorists might use this to test the airport "security" system.
And SgtScott31 takes a break from his lecture and claims that he takes all who "assualt" screeners with attitude off to jail:
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
With that said, if I catch anyone causing a disturbance or physically/verbally assualting any personnel during the screening process, I will make sure that a ride to jail is definite.
To make some interesting points:
Originally Posted by
SgtScott31
In my short time here, I have found several folks advising people to contact an attorney for being "illegally detained" or where TSA "falsely arrested" the person by not allowing them to leave the checkpoint until LEO arrival when an involved item found during the process was non-weapon related.
It is a simple fact that contraband of any sort found during the screening process will be brought to the LEO's attention. It is at that point in time where the LEO will decide whether to take criminal action against the passenger.
Now I can only personally speak of one airport (mine), but I have yet to hear a case out of any court in this country where contraband found during the screening process was not allowed or supressed because it was outside of TSA's scope of the search as so many of you claim. If there has been case precedent set, please provide the case-law and/or ruling.
It seems that since these rulings remain upheld in every court, which in my opinion is pretty common knowledge, people come to this forum to simply gripe about something that is legal and continues to be legal.
I would think it would be a much better use of time to send emails, write letters to the appropriate politicians, and/or have protests about such behavior rather than gripe about what should be illegal actions by TSA during searches at the checkpoint.
There are many such precedents where evidence was suppressed due to illegitimate search records, that do not involve airport security. IANAL, but this case law seemed well settled (evidence in plain view at traffic stops is admissible, evidence found by opening the trunk without express permission was not admissible) for searches in place since road blocks were legitimized by SCOTUS. The government has now extended the searches under cover of needing to find/stop terrorists at airports, and very occasionally, at other transportation nodes. Just because no court has yet ruled when the search goes out of bounds and when the evidence becomes inadmissible, doesn't mean to say they won't ever rule this way, and definitely doesn't mean to say SgtScott31's approach, (needing a we are always being tested
, we have arrestees who will shortly be at a well publicized trial
, you have to pass my made up on the spot criteria to take pictures at my airport
perspective to even sound plausible) will always be legitimate or upheld. This area of law seems unsettled again, with the ever increasing expansion of airport screening technique and scope.
It may take a perfect storm of well heeled "perp", egregious screener behavior and the right media coverage following it, but from everything I see, the TSA turns more people against them every day in behaviors that are not soon or easily forgotten by the recipients. It may take a while, but I would suspect that a legal spanking for the TSA may well be in their future. Or that's what I hope for, anyway.