The Latest "We Don't Search for Your Pot" Post
This time, the TSA felt compelled to go out on
We've all heard this before: TSA officers DO NOT search for marijuana or other illegal drugs. Our screening procedures are focused on security and detecting potential threats. But in the event a substance appears to be marijuana or a cannabis infused product, we’re required by federal law to notify law enforcement. 1. "a substance appears to be marijuana or a cannabis infused product..." The long-used term "accidentally discovered" is not used. This would imply that, if they saw pot on the x-ray, they would bust you. A further speculation is that they must teach what pot looks like at the infamous academy. 2. This also implies that they no longer have to invent a WEI excuse for searching your bag for pot or other drugs. They keep referring to "federal law" that requires them to call the cops. I was in federal civil and military service for over 40 years and I can honestly state that I have never seen this "law." Can anyone else quote chapter & verse? |
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 31096398)
This time, the TSA felt compelled to go out on Instagram, but it made the front page of FT.
We've all heard this before: This time around, there are a couple of subtle, but important differences: 1. "a substance appears to be marijuana or a cannabis infused product..." The long-used term "accidentally discovered" is not used. This would imply that, if they saw pot on the x-ray, they would bust you. A further speculation is that they must teach what pot looks like at the infamous academy. 2. This also implies that they no longer have to invent a WEI excuse for searching your bag for pot or other drugs. They keep referring to "federal law" that requires them to call the cops. I was in federal civil and military service for over 40 years and I can honestly state that I have never seen this "law." Can anyone else quote chapter & verse? https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzanne.../#1917a3d331e6 |
TSA, we don't need any stinking laws!
|
Now that marijuana is legal for so many people, has the protocol changed?
|
Originally Posted by yandosan
(Post 31098695)
Now that marijuana is legal for so many people, has the protocol changed?
|
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 31096398)
This time, the TSA felt compelled to go out on
We've all heard this before: This time around, there are a couple of subtle, but important differences: 1. "a substance appears to be marijuana or a cannabis infused product..." The long-used term "accidentally discovered" is not used. This would imply that, if they saw pot on the x-ray, they would bust you. A further speculation is that they must teach what pot looks like at the infamous academy. 2. This also implies that they no longer have to invent a WEI excuse for searching your bag for pot or other drugs. They keep referring to "federal law" that requires them to call the cops. I was in federal civil and military service for over 40 years and I can honestly state that I have never seen this "law." Can anyone else quote chapter & verse? This does not require that a LEO make an arrest or otherwise pursue a case against an individual found in possession of a controlled substance. But, TSA Officers are not LEO's and it is not their decision to make. If a TSA Officer reports the find to a LEO and the LEO chooses to simply dispose of the product and not pursue a case, that is well within the LEO's discretion and happens every day. |
Originally Posted by yandosan
(Post 31098695)
Now that marijuana is legal for so many people, has the protocol changed?
|
An interesting test case would be for someone to take a legal amount of pot to a checkpoint in a legalized state and send it through the x-ray as the only object inside a small carry-on, purse, or perhaps the pocket of a light jacket. The pot should be in a plastic bag, so they can't claim they couldn't see inside an aluminum foil-wrapped package. Heck, you wouldn't even have to use real pot. Oregano would work just fine. The goal would be to demonstrate that the TSA, does in fact, train its screeners to search for drugs by ruling out any other justification for searching the bag or jacket.
|
TSA officers DO NOT search for marijuana or other illegal drugs. Our screening procedures are focused on security and detecting potential threats. But in the event a substance appears to be marijuana or a cannabis infused product, we’re required by federal law to notify law enforcement. |
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/...512-story.htmlPot smuggling arrests at LAX have surged 166% since marijuana legalization
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 31100361)
Where do TSA screeners obtain the needed expertise to believe an item appears to be an illegal drug of any type? If training can't be demonstrated then only illegal contact with drugs could be the source of expertise.
|
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 31100012)
An interesting test case would be for someone to take a legal amount of pot to a checkpoint in a legalized state and send it through the x-ray as the only object inside a small carry-on, purse, or perhaps the pocket of a light jacket. The pot should be in a plastic bag, so they can't claim they couldn't see inside an aluminum foil-wrapped package. Heck, you wouldn't even have to use real pot. Oregano would work just fine. The goal would be to demonstrate that the TSA, does in fact, train its screeners to search for drugs by ruling out any other justification for searching the bag or jacket.
If they are really not looking for drugs, then a spice jar labelled 'oregano' or a baggie full of brownies or cookies should never be challenged if they pass the xray and a swab. I had legal prescription drugs confiscated because of the label. No swab or confirmation of the contents was done - the bottle was never even opened. |
Originally Posted by Often1
(Post 31099548)
This does not require that a LEO make an arrest or otherwise pursue a case against an individual found in possession of a controlled substance. But, TSA Officers are not LEO's and it is not their decision to make. If a TSA Officer reports the find to a LEO and the LEO chooses to simply dispose of the product and not pursue a case, that is well within the LEO's discretion and happens every day.
|
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
(Post 31096398)
This time, the TSA felt compelled to go out on Instagram, but it made the front page of FT.
We've all heard this before: This time around, there are a couple of subtle, but important differences: 1. "a substance appears to be marijuana or a cannabis infused product..." The long-used term "accidentally discovered" is not used. This would imply that, if they saw pot on the x-ray, they would bust you. A further speculation is that they must teach what pot looks like at the infamous academy. 2. This also implies that they no longer have to invent a WEI excuse for searching your bag for pot or other drugs. They keep referring to "federal law" that requires them to call the cops. I was in federal civil and military service for over 40 years and I can honestly state that I have never seen this "law." Can anyone else quote chapter & verse? 1. The implication you perceive here, is not the case at all. There are times where illegal items can present a similar appearance to some threat items, but that is incidental. 2. The search is for the same reasons it always has been, to prevent WEI/Dangerous items from getting on to planes, and is part of an overall administrative scheme The simple fact is, that TSA as an organization, does not teach people to search specifically for illegal drugs. A different reasoning for the difference in tone, is that possibly someone new is writing the dispatches and has a different style - at least, that is more reasonable than TSA incorporates (as part of it's overall training scheme) a direct statement to the workforce to actively search for illegal drugs. The training, and wording of this has remained almost exactly the same since I came to the organization - they actually tell you (repeatedly and in myriad different training courses) that you are not there to seek illegal drugs or illegal items, you are there to prevent possible threat items from getting on planes. I honestly think you are reading way too much into the way the release is written, because none of the teaching has changed, none of the overall message has changed. |
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 31120836)
I think you are reading too hard into the article, or perhaps appending your personal view on what is written. Items are not always "accidentally found", most times they are found "incidental to a search for a possible prohibited/dangerous/threat items". The search, is to determine if an item is a threat item, or something that is not a threat - if, during that search, a TSO finds something that appears to be illegal, they must notify the STSO/LEO by rule/regulation/law.
1. The implication you perceive here, is not the case at all. There are times where illegal items can present a similar appearance to some threat items, but that is incidental. 2. The search is for the same reasons it always has been, to prevent WEI/Dangerous items from getting on to planes, and is part of an overall administrative scheme The simple fact is, that TSA as an organization, does not teach people to search specifically for illegal drugs. A different reasoning for the difference in tone, is that possibly someone new is writing the dispatches and has a different style - at least, that is more reasonable than TSA incorporates (as part of it's overall training scheme) a direct statement to the workforce to actively search for illegal drugs. The training, and wording of this has remained almost exactly the same since I came to the organization - they actually tell you (repeatedly and in myriad different training courses) that you are not there to seek illegal drugs or illegal items, you are there to prevent possible threat items from getting on planes. I honestly think you are reading way too much into the way the release is written, because none of the teaching has changed, none of the overall message has changed. My response to that is, does TSA specifically recognize, commend, or reward TSOs who find illegal drugs, human traffickers, or other criminal activity incidental to screening? |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:12 am. |
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.