n5667

Doesn't smell like pot, though.

Superguy

I don't know that it has to be for someone interested in making the Big Catch®. "Looks like" seems to be enough.

n5667

Good, they'll wind up looking like an idiot and be too embarrassed to try again... perfect for ya!

stockmanjr

I agree that kiddie porn is a much more serious crime but both are suspicious items and both are illegal. So you support selective treatement of suspicious item's by TSO'S?
cheers
howie

GUWonder

Child pornography is, at least to people with some sense, far more obviously illegal in a way that is obviously not the case with "drugs", particularly given this situation.

In this situation, the TSA and cops couldn't even properly classify separately a legal substance vs. an illegal one for an extended period of time; instead the TSA and police let their twisted fantasies (of a "catch") run wild. What we had in this situation is: 1) the TSA getting alarmed by a legal substance that shouldn't alarm them; and 2) the police operating on the basis of their misclassification of a legal substance due to imagining "suspicious items" where there is no real contraband. There really is no excuse for what happened to this female traveller.

In any event, all this talk of child porn and drugs is misplaced, for neither illegal material/substances are involved here. Instead of muddying the matter, I suggest clearer thinking. Amongst other things, that is, instead of jumping to conclusions on matters not related to aviation security, the TSA should focus on looking for threats to aviation, and a full condom is not a threat -- something that ought to have been obvious to the TSA if they had their act together.

Newryman

Why oh why oh why do we end up side tracked by a "think of the children" type post in this thread? Is that really the best you can come up with? Avoid and deflect?

Child pornography, drug abuse, sticking your tongue in a donkeys backside has nothing to do with the simple fact TSA are overstepping the mark.

I find it interesting that the only defence the TSA apologists have is to rely on the boring repetitive "lets avoid the real issue and talk about kids so no one can argue with us defence". Not one single apologist has addressed the issues or questions asked of them. They avoid them like the bubonic plague. I wonder is there a reason for that?

Cue "but the kid pornography is an issue but I can not actually provide one single link where the TSA found kid pornography but I am sure you will all overlook that as I want to embarrass you into not using your brain!"

FrequentMcFlyer

Ok, try this...I think there is a degree of confusion going on here as to which standard is being applied regarding bag searches. I see many posts attempting to apply criminal procedural rules in an attempt to suppress the discovery of suspected illegal items. However, it is a fact that the standard for bag searches conducted by TSA, as part of a regulatory scheme, is administrative in nature. However if suspected criminal activity is discovered, referral to law enforcement occurs and unless solicited by a law enforcement officer to look into a bag for dope/porn, etc. in the first place, it's all fair game.

Personally, I find it absolutely hilarious that so many defenders of the dope show came out on this one! Better still, the "I'm only hurting myself" versus "someone is being hurt by another" standard retort doesn't hold water with me. Either way, it's suspected illegal activity detected by a government employee engaged in an administrative, and dare I say consensual search. They need not be a subject matter expert to refer to law enforcement what a reasonable person would suspect as illegal activity. Gotta love the reasonableness standard!

ND Sol

I don't think there is a confusion among the vast majority who have posted on this thread. The point is that TSO's should be looking only for items that are a credible threat to airport and airplane safety.

The searches we are subjected to are non-consensual in nature and therefore should be strictly limited for their narrow purpose. The TSO's are not trained to know what illegal drugs are, so if it doesn't alarm the ETD, then the passenger should be on his way. In that manner, situations like what happened to this woman would be avoided.