sort of a sidenote: if someone "lawyers up" during a simple inquery, i don't think there's much basis to complain about being treated "as a criminal" 'till the facts are known.

IMO...

Wow. So asserting a right that you have makes you guilty until proven innocent? :eek:

Glad you're not writing our laws. :rolleyes:

This is not a popular view here. From what I gather, we should all exercise our right not to speak to the police under any condition. Name, rank, and serial number only. Yet we still wish to retain the ability to "tsk-tsk" when we read stories of police questioning a neighborhood after a murder occurred in front of everyone, and no witnesses are willing to come forward. Much like citizens in the old Russia, or mob run towns, we should do nothing what-so-ever to assist the "man". After all, if the cops were any good, they would solve the crime without our help. The paranoia over the law enforcement community can be compared to earlier threads that spoke of the government's paranoia over terrorist on every street corner. Both are irrational and baseless.

Have a great day all! :p

Most of us can instantly recognize the difference between being a suspect and being a witness. These are totally different situations as far as I'm concerned.

Bruce

The few encounters I've had with airport police have been highly professional be it at the Louisville Airport Police, the Chicago Police Department, or another department in another city. I have the highest respect for those I've encountered and as you say, fair, professional, and reasonable.

Most recently, I had an officer engage me in conversation after I cleared a checkpoint at SDF while I was waiting for a colleague to get through the checkpoint. Pleasant conversation and a good individual.

I've had the Louisville Airport police assist me when I lost travel documents including a passport. Professional and helpful - another officer called me at home and left a message (before I got home) to advise me my documents were found & secure. I was then reunited with my documents!

I've spoken with airport police during a screening problem before - they were fair, professional, reasonable, and of great assistance to me. I had a TSA agent wanting to open medication bottles and pestering why I had class II controlled substances with me like I was a criminal (strong pain medication). The officer stepped in, told the TSA screener to buzz off and finish the search.

I've asked for assistance at JFK once - Port Authority Police got me pointed in the correct direction when airline employees couldn't even assist.

On one occassion, I have had a gate agent at ORD (UAx) call the police on me claiming harassment - I'll admit I was a bit pushy after being lied to by the agent, but never harassing, never raised my voice, never swore. CPD came out and handled it professional. The officers even assisted me with getting straight answers from the folks at UAx which helped secure my transport home -- in the end I was 240'd to another carrier for mechanical as I overheard, not weather as they claimed to the public. Got new ticket, DL and Comair got me home. If it wasn't for the officer, I would of spent the night at ORD plus this assisted other pax in the same situation.

On another occassion more recently (last year), I had a similar thing happen at ORD with UAx. Again CPD came out and handled it professionally. Needless to say, I refuse to fly via ORD with UAx anymore. UA mainline is fine, but keep me away from that UAx "F" concourse in Terminal 2. I've determined it's called the F concourse for a reason, not because it's between "E" and "G" :D :D

Bottom line, I have no problems with airport police -- in the above two scenarios I co-operated with them fully, I was polite, I answered their questions, and I in turn asked them to assist me. If it was to get ugly, I could then "lawyer up", but it never did get ugly and it was win-win in the end.

SDF_Traveler

Um, don't give out candy to strangers?a

do you differentiate between being routinely checked when other factors dictate and legally in a court of law?

yeah, it seems that way unfortunately.

i was trying to point out that if they don't meet the minimum criteria for the law enforcement officer for example, then they would be further scrutinized. that much i thought would seem clear cut & dried, but maybe not to some.

Can you try rephrasing that so it makes sense? Then I'll answer.

^ ^ I'm with you. Someone who trying to do their job in public service gets cooperation from me. Some so employed have attitude problems, but most I have encountered do not. If someone were to encroach on my rights in a serious way, I'd assert them. If someone is having a bad day, I don't want to be reason they get to take it out on someone if I am going to end up in worse shape than complying with reasonable cooperation for the sake of making a point that they will never get!


Teacher49

This outstanding advice makes this thread well worth bringing to the fore. :cool:

@:-) It cannot be overemphasized. @:-)

As long as you weren't doing anything wrong, why worry about answering a few questions. if I were a FAM and asked you a question and you said "Am I under arrest?" , then I'd be thinking you have something to hide. Just my opinion.

You seem to find a lot of behavior suspicious. I'm glad you are not a LEO. Just my opinion.

If you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide? Uh-huh.

Maybe I do. But there are an awful lot of people out there doing things that are wrong. Watch the news, you'll see. I'm glad I'm not a LEO too. Their unappreciated even more than the TSA. And considering what they do, they are way underpaid. They should make the salaries of some of these CEO's. There is nothing they can do to justify the millions their making. And really, if your not doing anything wrong, why worry about answering a couple of questions? ;)

Did you notice the implicit rationale -- in the following quote -- of "some do it, so all must be suspected of doing it"? Sort of a logical short-circuit in the reasoning. Or am I mistaken?