Section 107

You might not have ever knowingly been in the physical presence of and seen common illegal street drugs but it seriously strains credulity to posit you have never, ever seen such illegal drugs depicted in a movie, television show or photograph in a print medium to not have any knowledge basis for suspecting something MIGHT be one of those illegal substances..... I suggest most people will not know by sight whether something is oregano, parsley or actual marijuana with any certainty, but surely most will know enough to have a reasonable basis for suspicion and to notify proper authority.

One does not have to ever been a burglar or seen one in real life to suspect a person dressed in dark clothing creeping around your house, peering in windows and testing doors is a potential burglar and worthy of notifying proper authorities to investigate....

Having said that, I completely agree on being vigilant and wary of guvmint using administrative search exemption as a end-around the 4th amendment.

Boggie Dog

How so?

Boggie Dog

If you note I only listed things that I can honestly say I have never seen. I don't know if items on TV or movies actually represent the real deal so would not use those images as true examples. And thanks for questioning my integrity!

chollie

I think we've all seen bags of white powder - in movies or during TV news announcements about huge busts.

That said, TSA's attention to drugs and casual attitude towards powders generally worries me. There have been too many reports to ignore of clearly labelled cremains being opened and ashes spilled.

It will be bad if a TSO opens a container of powder for closer inspection and it's filled with cocaine instead of something harmless; it's going to be a really bad scene if a TSO opens a container of fentanyl for inspection.

I suspect the checkpoint rules are predicated on the assumption that no one will ever try to take a deadly powder - fentanyl or anthrax, say - through the checkpoint. It's both dangerous and ridiculous to make that assumption when TSA continues to treat every crotch as a potential security threat.

Boggie Dog

It's only going to be a matter of time before some TSA screener opens a bag of fentanyl and not only kills them self but contaminates a large area of an airport. I would be willing to bet that an ETD test of the outside of a container would give a reasonable result of WEI/Not WEI but we all know that TSA ​​​​​isn't smart enough to figure that out and continues to open containers of breast milk and cooking spices while looking for drugs.

chollie

I'd be worried about something being in a cremation container. There have been too many reports of cremains being opened at the checkpoint or checked bags showing up with an opened container and cremains scattered throughout the bag.

I get it, some containers are allegedly opaque and deadly items could be concealed inside, although a former TSO I met hinted that cremains are regularly replaced with drugs, but with the new war on powders, presumably based on reliable intelligence of a threat, I would like to think that TSOs have been taught to exercise more caution when opening containers whose contents they already consider suspicious.

If TSOs continue to open containers carelessly, I can only assume that they are following their training. There are too many academy-trained LTSOs and STSOs around watching - if opening untested containers to shake the contents up weren't SOP, those LTSOs and STSOs (and fellow TSOs) would be cautioning their co-worker.

They look for drugs to get attaboys for busts, but they forget that there actually are deadly powders around that require very careful handling.

Boggie Dog

Why would they believe that if someone hadn't told them that was a means to traffic. More indication that TSA is in fact looking for drugs which violates the Administrative Search.

chollie

I don't know the origin of the story that TSA routinely finds drugs substituted for cremains, or why it was 'common knowledge' at the airport (second tier international) where this individual worked. I've never heard or read anything like it, and you'd think if it was done often, someone would have leaked it to the media. Heck, I haven't even seen it in fictional TV shows or movies.

Maybe LE busted a bunch of drug-filled cremation urns at the airport and for some reason it never made the news but the TSOs were apprised of the threat.

I have no idea what the market value of a cremation urn full of some kind of powdered illegal drug would be, but I'm sure it would be enough to earn the FSD a good-sized bonus and s/he would obviously look favorably on the TSO(s) who made the catch.

Ari

They are just like private citizens. They see something, they say something. You and your stuff is [officially] free to go [YMMV on pretexts] so long as there is no WEI while law enforcement comes to the checkpoint.

Section 107

Not quite. A suspect article cannot be allowed through the checkpoint until it has been cleared by proper authority (which might be STSO or higher or LE depending upon the item). If the person voluntarily forfeits the item then the person can go through but that person might be subject to later detention (before or after boarding or upon arrival at destination by LE pending investigation.

YW. No, seriously, apologies if that was taken as a personal affront. I took your comment as, to paraphrase David Letterman, "writer's embellishment."

petaluma1

I

Your references are to cash - everyone knows what cash look like. This thread is about drugs. Show us the law that says screeners are obligated to report suspected drug finds to law enforcement.

gsoltso

For TSOs, all of the training tells them so, consistently. Also, I am certain that someone in legal would be able to make some form of a connection (for drugs) to the Controlled Substances Act and the cooperative agreements that come from it. IANAL, but I can see that there is at least one way that it could be presented as a cooperative agreement - which makes it at least a regulation.

*I am not aware of a specific CFR requiring it to be done, and I have no public information to put out other than the posts at the Blog and TSAs main page.

It also makes sense for TSOs that discover something that they think may be illegal drugs, to involve someone that has had more training, and is better equipped to handle items of that nature (the LEOs).

There are some images for fentanyl, and DHS/TSA have even put out some official signage on it. As far as giving TSOs a class to identify specific types of drugs (past those fentanyl references), I am unaware of anything like that. Fentanyl is a big concern at the moment, because we have seen an increase in the use of it in illegal ways, and it is transdermal. If a TSO comes into contact with it and does not have proper PPE on, they can receive a lethal dose just from holding it. So for awareness, fentanyl information has been pushed to the workforce, I have also seen tons of local LEOs having training on the same thing.

Section 107

Those referenced outdated and publicly available examples of guidance that was (and still is) SSI are provided as evidence of TSOs being required to refer suspicious situations to proper authority. It is more than reasonable to believe there is a range of current guidance for TSOs that has similar requirements and that it is not limited to situations involving currency.

petaluma1

We have laws that are SSI?

Where is that federal law?

Boggie Dog

What we have is facts not in evidence.