Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Passenger with broken wrist denied boarding due to "explosive residue"

Passenger with broken wrist denied boarding due to "explosive residue"

Old Feb 12, 2018, 5:44 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Passenger with broken wrist denied boarding due to "explosive residue"

Passenger with broken wrist blocked at Lambert after cast allege - KMOV.com

Sunday night, she slipped outside her hotel and broke her wrist. She was treated at DePaul Hospital and got a cast for her broken bone.

But when she tried to go through security at Lambert Monday morning, a machine detected "explosive residue" on her cast.

They wanted me to unwrap it and when they got to the thick cast part where my broken arm was just underneath it, then they said I should probably stop, Alerding said. But there's nothing I can do at that point and they kicked me out.
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Feb 12, 2018, 8:09 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,007
Once again we note that the TSA has no ability detect real bombs.
Pesky Monkey is offline  
Old Feb 12, 2018, 9:18 pm
  #3  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Proves that TSA ETD machines are no more reliable than Whole Body Imagers. WBI alerts on nothing resulting in crotch gropes, ETD alerts on many non threat compounds.
DoggyDaddy likes this.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 5:49 am
  #4  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
I found this sentence in the article somewhat informative:

A spokesperson for the TSA says agents cannot tell someone to remove a cast in screening but if alarms are repeatedly tripped, they can't clear the passenger to fly.
How often have we heard of screeners requiring passengers to remove boots from injured ankles and then walk through either the WTMD or MMW?
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 7:03 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,723
I really hope there is some sort of legal claim regarding treatment of a (temporarily) disabled passenger here. ADA amendments and court rulings have been more favorable for temporary disabilities recently IIRC.
Spiff likes this.
studentff is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 11:40 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,425
Originally Posted by studentff
I really hope there is some sort of legal claim regarding treatment of a (temporarily) disabled passenger here. ADA amendments and court rulings have been more favorable for temporary disabilities recently IIRC.
I hope so also. From the frequency of these reports over the years, it is evident that TSA has no ability whatsoever to screen these types of passengers. TSA basically either has to waive their screening or deny this entire class of passengers the right to move about the country.
Boggie Dog, Spiff and petaluma1 like this.
nachtnebel is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 1:07 pm
  #7  
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,509
Does anyone have a better option for screening the cast once it alarms? Unwrapping it is a bad idea, but if it alarms the (notoriously over-inclusive ETD machine), what can the screeners do to rule out the presence of explosives? I don't like the conclusion of this story better than anyone who has posted in this thread, but I'm not sure I have a better solution that wouldn't allow a cast made of explosives to fly.
Loren Pechtel likes this.
Ari is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 1:26 pm
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by Ari
Does anyone have a better option for screening the cast once it alarms? Unwrapping it is a bad idea, but if it alarms the (notoriously over-inclusive ETD machine), what can the screeners do to rule out the presence of explosives? I don't like the conclusion of this story better than anyone who has posted in this thread, but I'm not sure I have a better solution that wouldn't allow a cast made of explosives to fly.
Maybe look for other chemical signatures for use with the ETD that are not found in common hand lotions and 100's of other common, perfectly harmless household products.
flyingmango and altabello like this.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 1:45 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,723
Originally Posted by nachtnebel
I hope so also. From the frequency of these reports over the years, it is evident that TSA has no ability whatsoever to screen these types of passengers. TSA basically either has to waive their screening or deny this entire class of passengers the right to move about the country.
Originally Posted by Ari
Does anyone have a better option for screening the cast once it alarms? Unwrapping it is a bad idea, but if it alarms the (notoriously over-inclusive ETD machine), what can the screeners do to rule out the presence of explosives? I don't like the conclusion of this story better than anyone who has posted in this thread, but I'm not sure I have a better solution that wouldn't allow a cast made of explosives to fly.
Philosophically I believe the outcome of any government-run airport security screening in the USA should be either letting the passenger fly or referring them for immediate arrest and charges. Any other outcome is a 5th-amendment deprivation of liberty or property IMO (i.e., I don't believe TSA should be able to confiscate/ban items that are not actual WEI unlike the current policy that lets them confiscate ban non-WEI such as water because they are too incompetent to tell the difference*).

The burden of proof must be on TSA to prove that the item is a threat not on the passenger to prove that their person/property is not a threat. ETD alarm is clearly not probable cause for an arrest given the false positive rate. Banning a passenger based on an ETD alarm and nothing else sounds like a traffic cop charging a person with DUI based on smelling alcohol in a parked car with no breath test, blood test, impaired driving, or other evidence of DUI.

I agree this creates a real-life dilemma as posted by Ari, but TSA put itself in this position and is responsible for finding a resolution. Off the top of my head, options would be having an actual explosives expert visually examine the cast (maybe over video conference), screen the passenger for "paraphernalia" (i.e., detonator), or [gasp] taking the risk that a middle-aged American female plant-biology professor flying from a technical conference back to her university is actually suffering from a broken arm and not a suicidal terrorist mastermind. Say what you will about profiling based on various controversial and non-controversial criteria, but the totality of the circumstances should be considered before banning an American citizen from traveling.

(*I would allow a temporary exception of no longer than 90-days if a "new" threat was discovered, but no more. No 12-year water ban. No long-term laptop ban.)
Boggie Dog and Spiff like this.
studentff is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 2:52 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: IAH
Programs: UA
Posts: 595
Can anyone speak to the quantitative abilities of these screening devices? Can they detect "magnitudes" of anything? Or is it just detected / not detected? Can they differentiate between a trace detection, or a pure explosive material? (I'm probably answering my own question here.)
YadiMolina is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 2:57 pm
  #11  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Recently having two surgical procedures, I was amazed at the number of times the nursing staff washed their hands or used an anti-bacterial product before touching me. I could imagine the wrap she had on the cast being "soaked" in glycerin or some other chemical that tested as "explosive."
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 3:15 pm
  #12  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by YadiMolina
Can anyone speak to the quantitative abilities of these screening devices? Can they detect "magnitudes" of anything? Or is it just detected / not detected? Can they differentiate between a trace detection, or a pure explosive material? (I'm probably answering my own question here.)
I think having Trace in the name is a giveaway although they certainly aren't very good at the Explosive part of the task.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 3:27 pm
  #13  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by petaluma1
Recently having two surgical procedures, I was amazed at the number of times the nursing staff washed their hands or used an anti-bacterial product before touching me. I could imagine the wrap she had on the cast being "soaked" in glycerin or some other chemical that tested as "explosive."
Current standards require medical workers to use anti-bacterial products before touching a patient and after even if they will be donning gloves.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 3:54 pm
  #14  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Originally Posted by YadiMolina
Can anyone speak to the quantitative abilities of these screening devices? Can they detect "magnitudes" of anything? Or is it just detected / not detected? Can they differentiate between a trace detection, or a pure explosive material? (I'm probably answering my own question here.)
I think it's detected/not detected. Interesting to note that the TSA's ETD machines alarm on all sorts of things, but their explosive sniffing dogs don't. The dogs seem to be looking for "complete" explosives while the ETD machines look for components of explosives.
petaluma1 is offline  
Old Feb 13, 2018, 3:55 pm
  #15  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
Current standards require medical workers to use anti-bacterial products before touching a patient and after even if they will be donning gloves.
Agreed but this seemed to be more than I have observed in the past. Maybe because of the prevelance of the flu.
petaluma1 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.