Actually I meant that it is funny that Ron states he doesn't want to discuss a topic and then asks others to stay on that topic...

Did you mean funny, or consistent? ;)

While Ron is virtually powerless in his job, he would like to keep the pretense that he is privy to knowledge that many of us could only speculate about.:(

LOL! :D

Theory is in fact, correct. But to be doubly sure, the associate dean of a very noted, top 5 ranked law school goes to my church. I asked him over brunch about this. According to him, who is far smarter in these matters than I, and with unquestioned expertise, the congressional intent of the quoted law is to prevent counterfitting of the currency by fraudulently presenting a bill that has been damaged in exchange for one that has not. this is why the fed has a rule that it will not issue a new bill for a damaged one unless more than 50% of the damaged bill is presented to be exchanged. You are not allowed to damage a $20, present 51% of it to the treasury for a new twenty then present the 49% for another new twenty. Otherwise, burn away. As to the ownership of the cash, it is in essence a bearer instrument. Who has it in his possession owns it. No one else.

I am, in fact, correct, unless the good professor is also incorrect. Always a possibility, but I think, a very remote one.

Ron, what would be different about your actions when searching passengers -- the entire search, not just the part where you're supposed to find, by hand, something seen using the X-ray machine -- if we called what you do a search for tennis balls and we declared weapons, explosives, and incendiaries incidental to the search as you presently designate drugs? Would your actions be any different? If not, then what's the difference between what you're doing now and performing a search for weapons, explosives, incendiaries, and drugs?

If, during a search, you declared a firearm/drugs, I would immediatly call my supe and have him call the police. We're not looking for drugs, and frankly I don't care if you have an ounce of weed. It's the federal government that cares. Now if you're trying to bring these things through the checkpoint, you need to slapped 'cause you're a moron.

Phil, I have been trying for quite some time now to make sense of what you write above, but I'm just not making the trip. Could you possibly rephrase it for me please? I'm not trying to be obtuse, I just dont get what you are trying to ask.

question about TSA search for weapons, explosives, incendiaries, and drugs, rephrased
 

Sure. Following are two procedures. The first is what seems to be used by TSA now at airport checkpoints where passengers and their belongings are searched. The second is hypothetical. I'd like to know what, if any, difference in the effect of performing each these two procedures, you believe there to be. Consider, for instance, how the actions of the person(s) performing the search would vary depending on which of the two procedures he/she/they performed, when a weapon is discovered, when drugs are discovered, and when a travel pillow is discovered:

1. TSA staff examine the content of someone's bag using an X-ray machine and/or their hands and naked eyes. They claim to be "looking for" weapons, explosives, and incendiaries. If they see something that looks like a weapon, explosive, or incendiary (things for which they are looking) or something that looks like an illegal drug (something which they consider incidental to the search) they must contact a supervisor.
2. TSA staff examine the content of someone's bag using an X-ray machine and/or their hands and naked eyes. They claim to be "looking for" weapons, explosives, incendiaries, and illegal drugs. If they see something that looks like a weapon, explosive, incendiary, or illegal drug (things for which they are looking) they must contact a supervisor.

Other than what TSA staff claim to be searching for, is there a difference between each of those two procedures? It seems to me that in effect, they are the same.

With respect to the hand/eye search, there really isn't any difference. The x-ray search should be different in that if the x-ray operator sees an item that is not WEI, but is most probably drugs, then a bag check is not to be called.

I didn't intend to discuss the way things should be, just the difference between what TSA claims they're doing ("searching for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries", then notifying a supervisor if they find W, E, I, or drugs) and what it seems to me they're doing (searching for weapons, explosives, incendiaries, and drugs, then notifying a supervisor if they find W, E, I, or drugs).

Back to the Nude-O-Scope
 

Since OP started this track and we've derailed it and sent it everywhere but, I thought you'd like to know that Blogger Bob has clarified what the Nude-O-Scope can and cannot do. PV had a BB comment, He was responding to another comment which said, I guess we now know: the images we are shown, are not the actual image size and resolution the TSA sees. hmmm.



link

Thanks Phil, that was helpful.

Yes, there is a difference. We do not intentionally look for illegal drugs. If they are found, it is incidental to what we ARE looking for.

You still didn't answer the question.

Emphasis added:
I'm not asking about your intent or your claims about your intent; I'm asking about your actions. What would be different about your actions? What would be different about the result of performing each of the two procedures? You might want to consider eight scenarios:

1. while performing search #1, find something that looks like a weapon
2. while performing search #2, find something that looks like a weapon
3. while performing search #1, find something that looks like illegal drugs
4. while performing search #2, find something that looks like illegal drugs
5. while performing search #1, find something that looks like a travel pillow
6. while performing search #2, find something that looks like a travel pillow
7. while performing search #1, find something that looks like evidence of burglary and transportation of stolen goods (a bag of watches and a photograph of the passenger breaking into a jewelry store)
8. while performing search #2, find something that looks like evidence of burglary and transportation of stolen goods (a bag of watches and a photograph of the passenger breaking into a jewelry store)

Instead of causing terror at home and abroad, wouldn’t TSA be more productive if they all went over to Haiti to aid in the rescue, recovery and rebuilding?

I would like to see TSA go elsewhere but those poor people in Haiti have enough problems of their own.