|
Originally Posted by Smaug
(Post 16534329)
So if someone were to fail this resolution pat down with an ETD alarm, what's the next step to clearing the person?
Now if they believed a passenger really did have a bomb. I think that would be a very bad experience for the passenger. Remember alot of what they can do to the passenger is hidden behind SSI. |
Originally Posted by Firebug4
(Post 16534113)
In a way, the bolded statement is true. However, anyone that does any kind of personal search tends to be that way. When you are doing a personal search at least 8 times out of the 10 that you find something hidden, be it a weapon, illegal substances, contraband, stolen merchandise you name it, it will have been in the crotch area. A considerable amount of time and effort is spent in law enforcement training to get the officer to overcome the very human trait of being uncomfortable searching there. The Federal Academy that I attended taught that the body was split in to five quadrants that had to be searched. The crotch area was included in four of those five quadrants. That means if it was done as it was trained the crotch area was searched four times during the pat down.
Also, pat down is a generic term. We were taught to grab, twist, and feel. In the crotch area, more feel less grab and twist. FB You know the answer to that question and you know the strictly limited conditions leading up to this type of frisk. You couldn't do this to just anyone. |
Originally Posted by Liba
(Post 16530169)
How do pads for bladder incontinence or menstrual cycles feel different than bombs?
|
Originally Posted by BubbaLoop
(Post 16536022)
I´v been asking that question for a long time. I would also like to know how they look different, when viewed using imaging technology.
the issue is, what if you disguised bad things to look like those.... |
2, maybe 3, years ago, a colleague was working next to a construction site where explosives had been used in the demolition.
On leaving, the ETD alerted. The screener merely repeated the test three times until they got a negative result. The screener revealed this had been happening to a number of travellers and this was the best way to officially ignore it. |
Originally Posted by nachtnebel
(Post 16535639)
And whom did you perform this on and under what circumstances? On a 14-year old flying to visit grandparents, not suspected of any crime?
You know the answer to that question and you know the strictly limited conditions leading up to this type of frisk. You couldn't do this to just anyone. FB |
Originally Posted by Firebug4
(Post 16537436)
However, anyone crossing the border is subject to this type of search as well. The person doesn't have to be suspected of anything.
Someone entering private property could also be subject to that kind of search if the property owner wanted to do that again not suspected of anything. |
Originally Posted by FlyingCowboy
(Post 16527162)
... side to side and then up and down. Sorry I've got nothing but it makes me cringe thinking about possibly having to fly this fall. :( |
Originally Posted by Firebug4
(Post 16537436)
That is not quite correct. It is most often a law enforcement search. However, anyone crossing the border is subject to this type of search as well. The person doesn't have to be suspected of anything. Someone entering private property could also be subject to that kind of search if the property owner wanted to do that again not suspected of anything. However, I suspect that the business ( as this would most likely be the type of property owner) would have issues with patronage. You are correct in I do not the answer though.
FB Most Americans are not used to a real law-enforcement pat-down like that. |
Originally Posted by nachtnebel
(Post 16537515)
but as a matter of fact, this type of search is rarely done, is it not, and then only for some cause? So even if you *could* you folks don't. and why is that....
And there is no immunity from lawsuit (see the Santa Fe school district grope case of last month) in this, is there... Anyone can file a lawsuit for anything. The question is would the lawsuit be successful. The fact is the 4th amendment only applies to government intrusion with several exceptions. It does not apply to private property owners. The Santa Fe school district case will be interesting as a school district is quasi government. However, schools have been given some distinct latitude concerning searches by courts in the past. Time will tell. FB |
Originally Posted by Smaug
(Post 16534329)
So if someone were to fail this resolution pat down with an ETD alarm, what's the next step to clearing the person?
Mike |
While it is true that CBPOs are given absurdly wide latitude to violate the rights of the people who request entry, there is a limit I think. They cannot refuse entry for a US citizen with valid ID. Period. Even one who doesn't consent to any searches. And they cannot literally force you to have your genitals/crotch searched. As in physically. At least not without probably cause or at least reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or will be committed. Which means more than a vague hunch. IANAL though.
But if CBPOs are allowed to do whatever they please to your body as soon as you present yourself at the border even if you withdraw your request for entry then it is a gross constitutional and human rights violation and whatever federal law allows it should be annulled. I would physically resist such a rapesearch with whatever improvised weapons I had on hand. No government has the absolute right to engage in forced sexual contact with another human being. If a CBPO wants to get his jollies by jerking off a dog or pig or something I wouldn't have a major problem with that. After all, we routinely kill them. But as human beings we should be treating each other with more respect than that. Any government that treats people like that is a pathetic, out of control, police state. Full stop. Luckily, AFAIK, the only government in the world currently that would even be tempted by the idea is the US. Probably the most fascist-leaning government on the planet. |
Originally Posted by FlyingCowboy
(Post 16527162)
I opted out today, as always, and gotnthe standard patdown. I never gave the explosives residue test any thought before but when I saw them conferring I knew there was a problem. Sure enough, I was invited back to the private room for a more thorough pat down.
As it turns out, the super secret pat down is no different than the regular pat down with the exception that they run the fronts of their hands several times across the crotch, side to side and then up and down. It's as if they are crotch obsessed. Anyway, I handle both firearms and fertilizer on a regular basis and was told this could have triggered the super secret finely calibrated and regularly tested machine. Who knows. It never happened before. I just thought y'all would feel safer knowing that TSA was diligent enough to take this lifelong frequent flyer into the back room for some additional crotch screening. I would continue but I am now attempting to evade the wandering TSA mall walkers,, errrr, I mean behavior cue experts. They also wanted to photocopy my boarding pass and DL which I absolutely went off on them about. Finally conceded by just writing down the information for their "report". Also made several snide comments about "this type of alarm" like it was the ultra super bad one... whatever. And when I asked for the FSD and LEO, a "manager" came over and barked about "what didn't I like about their security screening process"... guess my answer of "any of it" didn't sit too well with her. Time for a complaint. So, now the question is what kind of hassles will I be getting now that I've "alarmed" for explosives? |
Originally Posted by GaryO3
(Post 16546957)
So, now the question is what kind of hassles will I be getting now that I've "alarmed" for explosives?
|
Shenanigans!
Originally Posted by Lara21
(Post 16535487)
Well with the lady in the wheelchair who was in her underwear. They told her to go home and comeback and try again the next day when they couldn't clear her.
Now if they believed a passenger really did have a bomb. I think that would be a very bad experience for the passenger. Remember alot of what they can do to the passenger is hidden behind SSI. :pAs I recall this story there was a past issue of agression between tsa and this lady which was why she dressed in that manner. IF tsa wanted to mess with her this was a way to do it. It is my belief that it would have been EASY to clear someone dressed like this. ANY issue tsa had could have been resolved by transferring her to another wheelchair and using new gloves and new swab.^ I'm not buying the tsa story!:mad: |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:42 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.