What happens when our stuff comes out of the xray? Who is responsible for ensuring that no one grabs something not theirs and walks off all while being detained in the WBI?

TSA needs to figure this out. TSA needs to make very clear what these machines do and follow PIA to gain consent.

Apologies for the tardy reply. The problem is your employer’s focus on non-threats such as drugs and cash are a dangerous distraction from keeping weapons, explosives and incendiaries from passing though the checkpoint. Using illegal drugs as an analogy is an example of this.

Actually we dont. We dont stop a bag because it may have drugs in it, drugs just happen to often appear as an organic substance, just like many explosives do. But if we go into a bag looking for your toothpaste and find your stash of dope then of course we notify a LEO. What the LEO does with the situation from there is up to them.

And thats how the vast majority of drugs are found in TSA workplaces. We are searching a bag for a suspected prohibited item and we find the stash. Its not intentional but we cannot ignore it. And once found its not our function to do anything about it, thats why we call a LEO. Its not a distraction to find them, but it does tend to be a pain in the neck.

I understand what you're saying, and why you're saying it. But, from my view in the cheap seats here, you are looking for drugs.

Let me put it this way. As a TSO, you have two lists: things you're supposed to look for (like weapons), and things you're supposed to refer to a LEO if you happen to discover them while searching for the stuff on the first list (like drugs). The mere existence of the second list means that you're making a decision about those items and whether they merit further investigation, either by you or a LEO. I've noted in the past, for example, that TSA doesn't seem interested in investigating possible violations of digital copyright law, even while it is interested in drugs. Somewhere, someone made a decision that "a huge pile of poorly labeled DVDs" isn't worthy of investigation, while "a big bag of white powder" is.

And, as has been noted here, the distinction between the first list and the second list is a subtle one that isn't always understood, by passengers and TSOs alike. (Hence, the Fofana case.)

So ... I think it's a little disingenuous for TSA to claim "we're not looking for drugs", when in fact TSA has specific rules that say you're supposed to take action if you find something that looks like drugs.

And, yes, I'm being very picky here.

Furthermore, aren't we passengers required to keep our belongings within view? I think I've heard an airport announcement about that somewhere.

Really? Didn't you just tell us that when you find something that looks to you like illegal drugs, you stop what you're doing, call police, and wait for them to arrive and take over the investigation?

I'm not sure why you'd be looking for toothpaste, but once you realized that it was not explosive, you're supposed to move on. If while you're pawing through our belongings, you find something that is clearly not a weapon, explosive, or incendiary, but looks to you like it might be a substance that some people are barred from possessing in some places under some circumstances, why would initiating a police investigation of that substance take precedence over searching the next person for dangerous items?

How is that different for your Congressionally-mandated search for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries? You search people's belongings, and if you see something that looks like a weapon, explosive, incendiary, or illegal drug, you take action, right? In some cases, you call the bomb squad, in some cases you confiscate the item, and in some cases, you call the police.

Looking at this a different way, you could just as easily say that you are not searching for bombs, but if you see something that looks like a bomb while you're digging around trying to find some toothpaste, you're going to report it.

Come on, Ron. You're not really searching for anything. You're simply searching people and their belongings. And when you find any of a number of items, you take action. Those items that, when found during your search, trigger further investigation, include drugs, right?

Wrong. You can ignore it, just like you ignore a number of other things which might indicate wrongdoing, might not indicate wrongdoing, and almost certainly do not present a danger to anyone if they are carried into the airport or onto an airplane.

I think it's more than disingenuous.

Yep, but when we open the bag drugs are never what we are looking for.

Phil, I’m not going to get into the whole “legalize” issue with you. I know your stand on it, and it is meaningless to me until such time as you either succeed in your quest or you decide to stop beating that dead horse. I have no horse in that race either way, I just wish people would stop putting myself and my fellow TSO’s in the middle of their problems. I don’t care if you do dope or not, just keep it away from my airport. I don’t need the headache.

When I find what I am looking for I stop the search. Period. If between starting the search and that time when I find the prohibited item I am looking for I find your stash, I am going to call a supervisor and then move on to the next bag. If you are dumb enough to try and transport an illegal substance through a TSA checkpoint then you get what you deserve if its discovered.

I don’t do any of those, I call a supervisor or offer the passenger the options on what they can do with their LGA’s.

Was that intended to make sense? Sorry, I don’t get your point.

I’m sorry you feel that way Phil. When I go into a bag on the checkpoint I know what I am looking for, or at the very least what it should look like. If I find something else (clothing, radios, sex toys, etc) then its just a part of the job. Large stack of paper look like blocks of cheese, which looks like blocks of C-4, which goes bang. Some CD players look like control circuits, with leads going to another area of the bag (head phones), near an organic item, which is what Semtex looks like, which goes bang. Under your ankle weights I can see something that also has a significant metallic content, which sort of looks like the slide to a semi-auto pistol I know about, even if it is your cell phone. Get the idea?
No, not according to SOP I cant. I like my job, I’d like to keep it for a while.

Not only that, TSA touts every time it makes a Big Catch® with respect to drugs ... :rolleyes:

A question for the experts
 

Let me just put this out there: I'm wholly opposed to the use of the WBI scanner as a means of primary screening.

But my question for the experts out there is this: How does this machine distinguish between a maxi pad, adult diaper, tampon and a package of explosives packed in the form of any of the above?

For example, couldn't a terrorist (or drug mule for that matter) simply empty out the padding contained in the above and supplant it with the powder explosives (or cocaine) and be on their merry way?

And if the above is true, as a woman, can I expect to be greeted with the same kinds of inquiries I get from my OB-GYN at the end of the WMI scanner? And will the screener be satisfied with my answer? Or will even more intimate details (i.e. physical proof) have to be forthcoming?

call it a search for gold if you want; TSA bag search treats drugs just like weapons
 

If for any reason you are searching someone's belongings, whether that be by hand or by X-ray, and you see something that looks to you like illegal drugs, you are going to "stop a bag" just as if you found something that looked like a weapon or an explosive, right?

I didn't ask you to do so. You brought up the topic of ending marijuana prohibition. I didn't.

Those people probably wish that you would stay out of their business.

There must be some miscommunication, here. When you start your search of someone's belongings, whether that search be by hand or by X-ray, you're supposed to be searching for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries. In practice, you're also searching for controlled substances, evidence of immigrations violations, evidence of credit card fraud, and probably several other things. Do you mean to tell me that you will keep searching until you find one of those things? I doubt it.

Isn't that precisely what you'll do if you find something that looks like a bomb or other weapon? In either case, you're looking through someone's belongings in an attempt to find things that are not supposed to be there. In either case, if you see something that looks like one of certain items that are not supposed to be there, you're going to stop and call a supervisor. You're only going to move on to the next bag if you can do so without releasing the one with the suspicious item. Please tell me the difference in your reaction to finding something that you suspect is an illegal drug and something that you suspect is a weapon.

I stand corrected. So if you find weapons, explosives, incendiaries, or drugs, you call a supervisor.

Now, please answer the question I asked. You search people's belongings, and if you see something that looks like a weapon, explosive, incendiary, or illegal drug, you take action, right? In each case, you call a supervisor. You're treating drugs the same as weapons when you search a bag, right?

According to what you've told us, weapons, explosives, incendiaries, and drugs are all treated the same by you, except that you say you're not searching for one of them, just the others. If you find any during your search, the result is the same. Am I missing anything?

Yes, I intended for that to make sense. What's the difference between 1) you searching for bombs but not drugs, and 2) you searching for bombs and drugs, if you're going to take the same action when you find bombs or drugs?

You keep telling us that you're not searching for drugs, and that you are searching for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, but you're clearly searching for drugs as well. You tell us, "I"m not searching for drugs, but if I see them while searching your bag, I'll take action." I'm saying that we could describe what you do by saying, "TSA are not searching for bombs, but if they see one while searching a bag, they'll take action." You follow?

Ron, do you understand that when you look inside a bag with an X-ray machine, you are searching the bag? You may be trained to play fetch, but you TSA bag examiners as a group search every carry-on bag. I don't care what you say you're looking for, but the truth is that you're going to look at everything, and if you find something that looks like weapons, explosives, incendiaries, or drugs, your next step is exactly the same: call a supervisor. This tells me that if what you're doing should be considered a search for weapons, it should also be considered a search for drugs.

I'd like to know how you summarize the following instructions: "Examine content of bag, either by hand and naked eye, or with the assistance of an X-ray machine. If anything in the bag appears to be a weapon, explosive, incendiary, illegal drug, large quantity of cash, or toothpaste, alert a supervisor." You can call it a search for gold or anything else, but it's still a search for dangerous items, drugs, cash, and toothpaste.

WBI cannot see a tampon. I am of the opinion that it also cannot a regular pad (perhaps it could see parts of a maxi pad but certainly not a small pad.)

Think about it: When one steps into the WBI one has to raise one's arms in the air. Why? To see under the armpit and inside of the arm. However, one is not told to assume a very wide stance and/or squat so that the WBI can "see" into the crotch. Therefore, something small in the crotch cannot be detected. Further, if one contracts one's pelvic muscles while in the WBI one is further hiding whatever might be in the crotch.

This is why most security experts are qualifying their statements re WBI and the Christmas terrorist: WBI might have stopped the attempt.

Thanks
 

I feel better and worse at the same time.

People keep saying things like that but I have yet to see any hard data to support it. I suppose there is a report out there somewhere that you can provide a link to? If not I understand.

On the XRay it is very very difficult to tell the difference between a block of cheese and a block of C4. The same goes for most organic items. Which is why we will call for a bag check.

I’d love to, stop bringing it to my checkpoint and we both are happy.

No, when I start a search of a bag on the checkpoint I am looking for a specific item seen by the XRay operator. Nothing more and nothing less. Once I find that item my search is over. I will rerun the bag through the XRay to verify that I have found the item and that there are no other prohibited items in the bag. It’s the XRay operators job to use his device to detect prohibited items.

No difference, I will call a supervisor in either case. By weapon I mean a firearm, knives and such I have the authority to deal with on my own, unless its larger than 3inches.

If I hand a bag over to a supervisor, its his / her responsibility, and I get back to taking care of mine.

Correct.

When I search a bag its to find a specific prohibited item. Depending on what it is I either deal with the issue myself or I call for a supervisor. Believe me, I know when to call a supervisor over. I am NEVER searching a bag for drugs. Not my job. But if I find them then I am required to notify a supervisor.

Yes, you missed a key point. I intentionally search for prohibited items, I do not intentionally search for drugs. Finding them is incidental to the search I am conducting, but still require action.

See above.

No Phil. No. Intent is the point. I intentionally search for prohibited items, I do not intentionally search for drugs. Drugs are not the TSA’s concern, just as child abuse is not a citizens concern, unless they are mandated to report it if suspected. I am mandated to report the finding of anything I suspect to be an illegal substance.

Uhh, yeah.

See above.

I would summarize those instructions as inaccurate. When I open a bag or view one on the XRay I am looking for specific things, those things do not include drugs or cash. If I happen to find those things (which by the way do not appear as either on the XRay) during my search then I have specific instructions to notify a supervisor.

Determining what something is on our XRay system is far more of an art form than a cut and dried system. One must actually do it to understand the difference.

Why is cash such a threat. AFAIK it's still legal to carry to carry cash in the US.

Its not a threat. And yes, you can travel all over the US with as much as you like. Its when one is traveling outside of the US that the concerns start. One must declare sums of cash equal to or larger than $10,000 with Customs. If you have done so then there is no problem.