Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues
Reload this Page >

Court Says Travelers Can't Avoid Airport Searches

Court Says Travelers Can't Avoid Airport Searches

Old Aug 23, 07, 2:34 pm
  #91  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 576
Originally Posted by bocastephen View Post
Charming. Nice post to build your credibility. For the record, you don't have a clue what any of us have been doing to 'stand up and be heard' or who we've been talking to. Rest assured I've had multiple documents before the House Sub-Committee on Aviation which lay out a clear path and justification for reducing the TSA to nothing more than an information liaison between DHS and the various transportation departments, while restoring security management to the FAA. I'm working quite hard to ensure your employer's days are numbered, and it won't come at a moment too soon.

Every day the TSA retains control of aviation security and their staff patrol our airports is another day we're at risk for disaster.
Return it to the FAA. Sounds interesting. Care to share your multiple documents?
tsadude1 is offline  
Old Aug 23, 07, 3:31 pm
  #92  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Concord, CA
Programs: AA PLT, MileagePlus
Posts: 2,617
Originally Posted by tsadude1 View Post
Return it to the FAA. Sounds interesting. Care to share your multiple documents?
I'd like to see those docs too but I suspect we commoners won't be able to see them... unless they aren't covered by some "security" umbrella
DEVIS is offline  
Old Aug 23, 07, 3:56 pm
  #93  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: FLL/LAX/YYZ/TPE
Programs: CO Platinum 1K, United 1K, SPG LT Platinum, National Executive Elite, Platinum TSA Hater
Posts: 33,786
Originally Posted by DEVIS View Post
I'd like to see those docs too but I suspect we commoners won't be able to see them... unless they aren't covered by some "security" umbrella
Nothing secret about them...just briefs sent for the panel's consideration. I've basically posted most of the content here in the forum in one form or another over the last year or so, but I'm not going to post the actual full content of the brief here only because I'm about to escalate it outside the Committee to get some third-party buy-in.

Needless to say, the Committee is in no hurry to change the status quo and risk being labeled 'soft on terror' by Herr Chertoff and his pet Kippy...the push to take action is going to come in the form of pressure from outside sources.
bocastephen is offline  
Old Aug 23, 07, 4:50 pm
  #94  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 576
Originally Posted by bocastephen View Post
Nothing secret about them...just briefs sent for the panel's consideration. I've basically posted most of the content here in the forum in one form or another over the last year or so, but I'm not going to post the actual full content of the brief here only because I'm about to escalate it outside the Committee to get some third-party buy-in.

Needless to say, the Committee is in no hurry to change the status quo and risk being labeled 'soft on terror' by Herr Chertoff and his pet Kippy...the push to take action is going to come in the form of pressure from outside sources.
So it could be a loooonnnnng time with elections coming up.
tsadude1 is offline  
Old Aug 23, 07, 5:13 pm
  #95  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,945
Originally Posted by Danski View Post
I personally do not have much of an expectation of privacy as to my bags when I put them on the screening belt, but that is just me. In my view, if a screener opens a bag becuase they saw something on the x-ray screen that they couldn't rule out as a weapon, and in the process of trying to rule the object out they come upon contraband, it is going to be admissible. If the screener is searching a bag to go on a fishing expidition, that may be another story.
A checkpoint screening is an administrative search that involves implied consent. As such it must be narrowly tailored to only search for items that are prohibited from being airside. That is why the TSA will not be giving lessons to TSO's on what drugs look like. If a TSO does see something illegal unrelated to airplane security in a legitimate search for prohibited items, then the TSO may be able to report it to an LEO. But this whole idea of reporting "suspicious items" is a standard that is just too ripe for a fishing expedition.
ND Sol is offline  
Old Aug 23, 07, 6:49 pm
  #96  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: ONT/LAX/SNA
Posts: 364
Originally Posted by ND Sol View Post
A checkpoint screening is an administrative search that involves implied consent. As such it must be narrowly tailored to only search for items that are prohibited from being airside. That is why the TSA will not be giving lessons to TSO's on what drugs look like. If a TSO does see something illegal unrelated to airplane security in a legitimate search for prohibited items, then the TSO may be able to report it to an LEO.
I also believe this to be the current state of the law.


Originally Posted by ND Sol View Post
But this whole idea of reporting "suspicious items" is a standard that is just too ripe for a fishing expedition.
I think that this is what much of the debate has been, and will continue to be about.
Danski is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: