TSA and the War on Drugs

Old May 7, 2012, 7:37 pm
  #31  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,153
Originally Posted by castrobenes
My point is that the standard of proof for evidence in this thread is very weak.

I will address your statement. I have worked at airports for over 9 years in a lot of positions within TSA. I have never heard anyone in leadership encourage a TSO to look for drugs or illegal items. I have read each change to the SOP, and all of them have included the disclaimer to not look for anything outside TSA's mandate but to call the cops when it is found in the course of looking for something else.

I have done equipment maintenance on ETD machines. But I don't have access to the settings which determine the substances it detects. I wouldn't know how to switch them if I had access. I don't believe that the machines test for drugs because I have personally not seen many ETD alarms lead to drug arrests. I can't recall any actually.

I also have not seen many EDS alarms lead to drug arrests. Maybe 1 or 2 and the drugs were not the alarm they were found as a result of another search. Actually at my airport we find drugs about once every two to three weeks. Given the prevalence of drugs in the US, if the machines were looking for drugs we should expect to see many more drug arrests.

The whole argument is preposterous. Drugs are everywhere in the US. I see people dealing on my way into work. Every low income neighborhood has identifiable crack houses and areas to buy drugs. Cops could make arrests all day long if they wanted.

It makes no sense to create a dragnet at the airport especially when everyone knows that TSA searches your bags. It would be the most poorly thought out conspiracy ever. There are better ways to arrest drug users and you don't need to worry about covering anything up to do it.

I think that there is a good debate about the constitutionality of TSA searches, and also a good debate about the wisdom of TSA practices in general aside from the constitutional arguments. But this thread started because someone claimed to have met a guy who found drugs in his Russian doll style suitcases, and claims to have been searched every time. Seriously if this is your best argument, then you need to rethink your strategy.

The only person dumber than someone bringing drugs to an airport is the person who read this thread and thought it proved anything.

castro
1. I don't have time to look them up now, but, the manufacturer's websites make the sales pitch that these devices can be set to detect narcotics. They sell them to police departments.

2. It does make sense if one's goal is to trump up one's value to society by taking criminals off the street. Your leadership loves to make known the number of drug arrests (all coincidental, of course) from bag searches and SPOTNik surveillance. Congress and a large percentage of the American People don't really care whether or not this type of "police activity" is legal. The TSA wants to arrest "bad" people at airports. They don't care how they do it or why they are "bad."

3. The easiest way to conduct narcotics trafficking at America's airports is to bribe as many clerks (including management clerks) as is necessary to get the job done. Based on those arrested, their going rate is pretty cheap.
FliesWay2Much is offline  
Old May 7, 2012, 7:47 pm
  #32  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: GEG
Programs: Motel 6 Club Avoir Le Cafard
Posts: 5,027
Originally Posted by thaliajen
I'm about losing it with the TSA but not over drugs. Seems that my "Flyertalk" tag, the yellow one I got when I won the Flyertalk contest for the race through Europe, makes the TSA at DTW more than a little angry. I had NO idea why I was constantly being pulled out of line and placing my hands on my head to traipse through the "machine". 2 weeks ago I had every bag in my possession searched.

A few months back I had a kindly TSA agent TELL me that I was "one of THOSE people" and pointed to my yellow tag. I don't know WHAT will stop the harassment but taking the tag off will be my last resort.
Attention all terists! Just walk in behind one of them commie pinko Flyertalk types and you'll skate through the checkpoint while we show the Flyertalker who's who.
mbstone is offline  
Old May 7, 2012, 8:21 pm
  #33  
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Easton, CT, USA
Programs: ua prem exec, Former hilton diamond
Posts: 31,801
Originally Posted by thaliajen
I'm about losing it with the TSA but not over drugs. Seems that my "Flyertalk" tag, the yellow one I got when I won the Flyertalk contest for the race through Europe, makes the TSA at DTW more than a little angry.
Yeah, you won't want to be displaying anything flyertalk related as you go through security.
cordelli is offline  
Old May 7, 2012, 8:24 pm
  #34  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 145
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
1. I don't have time to look them up now, but, the manufacturer's websites make the sales pitch that these devices can be set to detect narcotics. They sell them to police departments.
The machines are the same machines used by the prison system to detect for drugs. If the drug settings were turned on, then there should be more arrests.

Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
2. It does make sense if one's goal is to trump up one's value to society by taking criminals off the street. Your leadership loves to make known the number of drug arrests (all coincidental, of course) from bag searches and SPOTNik surveillance. Congress and a large percentage of the American People don't really care whether or not this type of "police activity" is legal. The TSA wants to arrest "bad" people at airports. They don't care how they do it or why they are "bad."
So your theory is that TSA leadership has engaged in a secret plot to turn on the ETD drug settings to generate good publicity about drug arrests. This also doesn't make sense. A better plot would have been to coverup the arrests of TSA employees, especially since so many of the arrests involve TSA employees turning in other TSA employees.

I also am critical of any TSA trumpeting of drug or contraband arrests. I think the entire TSA blog is a bad idea.

However most of the arrest stories are generated by reporters copying police reports. TSA doesn't arrest these people to begin with.

Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
3. The easiest way to conduct narcotics trafficking at America's airports is to bribe as many clerks (including management clerks) as is necessary to get the job done. Based on those arrested, their going rate is pretty cheap.

How is this related to the conspiracy theory that TSA somehow has turned on ETD drug settings to generate good publicity?

For the record, I have no problem with submitting to a search of my person or property as a condition of TSA employment. Screen me as often as you want, screen my employees.

I think everyone should be screened each time they enter the sterile area (except for LEOs).

castro
castrobenes is offline  
Old May 7, 2012, 8:53 pm
  #35  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by castrobenes
The machines are the same machines used by the prison system to detect for drugs. If the drug settings were turned on, then there should be more arrests.



So your theory is that TSA leadership has engaged in a secret plot to turn on the ETD drug settings to generate good publicity about drug arrests. This also doesn't make sense. A better plot would have been to coverup the arrests of TSA employees, especially since so many of the arrests involve TSA employees turning in other TSA employees.

I also am critical of any TSA trumpeting of drug or contraband arrests. I think the entire TSA blog is a bad idea.

However most of the arrest stories are generated by reporters copying police reports. TSA doesn't arrest these people to begin with.




How is this related to the conspiracy theory that TSA somehow has turned on ETD drug settings to generate good publicity?

For the record, I have no problem with submitting to a search of my person or property as a condition of TSA employment. Screen me as often as you want, screen my employees.

I think everyone should be screened each time they enter the sterile area (except for LEOs).

castro
All the way up to your resistance?
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2014, 7:39 pm
  #36  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
TSA Assists DEA in Search of NFL Visiting Team Bags for Drugs

I was checking up on my Sunday reading and found this little tidbit buried in a story:

Federal drug agents conducted surprise inspections of National Football League team medical staffs on Sunday as part of an ongoing investigation into prescription drug abuse in the league. The inspections, which entailed bag searches and questioning of team doctors by Drug Enforcement Administration agents in cooperation with the Transportation Security Administration, were based on the suspicion that NFL teams dispense drugs illegally to keep players on the field in violation of the Controlled Substances Act, according to a senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation.
(Bold is mine.)

Part of a larger story "Federal drug agents launch surprise inspections of NFL teams following games" from the Washington Post.

My questions are what role did the TSA have and why did the DEA even need them?
InkUnderNails is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2014, 8:43 pm
  #37  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DCA/IAD
Programs: AS, US, Hilton, BA, DL, SPG, AA, VS
Posts: 1,628
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/16/us/dea-nfl-investigation/

According to this, the encounter with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers took place at BWI.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...icle-1.2012969

And according to this (15th paragraph), NFL teams are routinely screened at hotels or stadiums before they leave for the airport.

Either of those could explain TSA involvement.
LETTERBOY is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2014, 9:07 pm
  #38  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
Originally Posted by LETTERBOY
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/16/us/dea-nfl-investigation/

According to this, the encounter with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers took place at BWI.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...icle-1.2012969

And according to this (15th paragraph), NFL teams are routinely screened at hotels or stadiums before they leave for the airport.

Either of those could explain TSA involvement.
Yes and no.

The TSA would be searching for WEI. We know that. The do it for all professional teams that travel by air. But, why would the DEA need assistance for a drug search?

The search for WEI is an administrative search. The one done by the DEA is a criminal investigation. Conjecture: The teams line up for the expected WEI search and the trainers and physicians are suddenly lined up for a search that involves possible criminal charges and prosecution. Were there warrants issued? I would think that there had to be if this was a criminal investigation. So, a team away from home is going home and expecting the normal WEI search and finding a search for criminal activity. IANAL, but is this even legal?
InkUnderNails is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2014, 9:46 pm
  #39  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Programs: A3, AA. Plasticy things! That give me, y'know, Stuff!
Posts: 6,293
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails
IANAL, but is this even legal?
Run a dog down the line and if it alerts you get to search the whole lot?
SeriouslyLost is offline  
Old Nov 17, 2014, 4:57 am
  #40  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 247
Alas, it is called mission creep
DIFIN is offline  
Old Nov 17, 2014, 9:45 am
  #41  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DCA/IAD
Programs: AS, US, Hilton, BA, DL, SPG, AA, VS
Posts: 1,628
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails
The one done by the DEA is a criminal investigation.
In both articles I linked to, the DEA clearly states that the searches were administrative and not criminal. If it were criminal, don't you think they would've had to get search warrants?
LETTERBOY is offline  
Old Nov 17, 2014, 9:53 am
  #42  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,153
Originally Posted by LETTERBOY
In both articles I linked to, the DEA clearly states that the searches were administrative and not criminal. If it were criminal, don't you think they would've had to get search warrants?
Not these days in the USSA.
FliesWay2Much is offline  
Old Nov 17, 2014, 10:00 am
  #43  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,153
Originally Posted by LETTERBOY
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/16/us/dea-nfl-investigation/

According to this, the encounter with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers took place at BWI.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...icle-1.2012969

And according to this (15th paragraph), NFL teams are routinely screened at hotels or stadiums before they leave for the airport.

Either of those could explain TSA involvement.
I didn't read anything about the BWI incident with the Bucs in the local papers that suggested the TSA did anything other than let the druggies into the secure area. I suspect they don't need the TSA's help searching luggage and frisking people.

Based on the way my Giants played on Sunday, they should have raided the Giants rather than the 49ers.
FliesWay2Much is offline  
Old Nov 17, 2014, 10:11 am
  #44  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Originally Posted by LETTERBOY
In both articles I linked to, the DEA clearly states that the searches were administrative and not criminal. If it were criminal, don't you think they would've had to get search warrants?
The WaPo article stated this:

He (Rusty Payne) characterized the DEA actions Sunday as administrative in nature,
That's different than a definitive statement saying they were administrative searches. More like weasel words to my way of thinking.
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Nov 17, 2014, 1:39 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Seattle, Wash. USA
Posts: 1,530
Originally Posted by LETTERBOY
In both articles I linked to, the DEA clearly states that the searches were administrative and not criminal. If it were criminal, don't you think they would've had to get search warrants?
If the DEA kicks in the door of a meth lab, it's a raid. If they kick in the door of an NFL locker room, it's an unannounced inspection. Same goes for banks.
chucko is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.