
“Do I have the right to refuse this search?” - jp_sc
http://www.hlswatch.com/2009/10/15/
======
Benjo
I once had a strange experience where, after taking a drink of water from a
Camelbak bottle, a police officer asked me if he could see my water bottle. He
was about 15 away, at the corner, waiting to turn left at a stoplight. I
handed him the bottle, he opened it, smelled it, and made some comment about
how it's illegal to have an open container of alcohol in public. It was
summer, evening, and still light outside.

I remember being so caught of guard that I never even realized I was
consenting to a government search until it was over. The officer was so
conversational in his tone that I had no idea why in the world he would want
to see my water bottle. Afterwards I regretted not refusing the search as it
would have been an easy opportunity to stand up for my own constitutional
rights. In the future, I can only imagine I will be on guard, treat any police
officer with suspicion and only cooperative as much as is necessary.

~~~
radu_floricica
I started to write a reply to your comment expressing my confusion, when I
realized I had wrongly assumed you were in the car and the police officer on
foot. Once I realized the situation was reversed, I immediately agreed.

Which makes me think there are two kinds of crimes. Crimes which are bad for
their effects, and preventive measures. Of course there are grey areas, but
driving and drinking is very close to doing actual damage, while walking and
drinking is pretty much harmless.

I think it's a shame no law system makes any difference between the two. It
would also put a lot of the drug legislation in a different light.

~~~
diziet
I do not even see where 'walking and drinking' comes in. The poster clearly
said he took a drink of water out of his water bottle.

------
awlo
I find this fragment really insightful. Seems like it's a common mistake in a
lot of domains.

"Over the last fifteen years or so, many police agencies started capturing
data on police interactions. The primary purpose was to document what had
historically been undocumented: informal street contacts. By capturing
specific data, we were able to ask ourselves tough questions about potentially
biased-policing. Many agencies are still struggling with the answers to those
questions.

Regardless, the data permitted us to detect problematic patterns, commonly
referred to as passive discrimination. This is a type of discrimination that
occurs when we are not aware of how our own biases affect our decisions. This
kind of bias must be called to our attention, and there must be accountability
to correct it."

~~~
CWuestefeld
I'm not so sure. I read the OP to say that they're making efforts to ensure
that no demographic group is getting a larger proportion of scrutiny.

She says nothing about how this correlates to actual crimes. I assume that
she's intentionally trying to keep that out of the picture -- but doesn't that
make them less efficient? If young adult males account for a lion's share of
the crime, then why force yourself to look away from them and choose an old
lady?

Surely there's a difference when you're trying to prevent a very small number
of high-profile events, versus regular police work. In trying to stop a
terrorist organization, they've (presumably) got the resources to play this to
their own benefit by intentionally choosing that old lady as their agent. On
the other hand, in day-to-day police work, I'd think that statistics are
everything: the potential criminal _is_ a young man, and there's precious
little he can do about that, so (assuming that's what the statistics say),
that's where one ought to concentrate.

~~~
awlo
You've got a point there. More data would be nice too.

My understanding of it, is that the data is used to check whether some groups
don't receive too much unnecessary attention at the cost of not paying enough
attention to other groups because of some non concious bias.

"On the other hand, in day-to-day police work, I'd think that statistics are
everything"

Statistics are worth attention, but I really hope they're not everything in
police work;)

------
ck2
I love how people try to be logical about all this. There is no logic, it's
nutcases vs power-trippers.

Here's the reality - it's not IF but WHEN the next nut gets through TSA with
something else, not something new, but something they were supposed to be
looking for in the first place. These are all slackers on a power-trip, who
else would apply for such a job?

So what are they going to invent next to harass everyone? How exactly are they
going to do cavity searches, or is this step meant to get us accepting enough
for the next level?

The next idiot might hijack a private corporate jet with no security, and
that's going to make an interesting battle of corporate lobbyists for
"freedom" vs. power-tripping security theater hiding behind "keeping you
safe".

~~~
shareme
But, that will always happen as TSA can only plan for what past happen not
future happened.

The FBI, Secret Service, Treasury, CIA, etc have a record of 75% or higher of
catching terrorists before the act.

Guess what TSA's record is? ZERO! Think about that for second. How many
Congress people are connected to the companies supply and benefiting from
TSA's obvious miss-management?

For security you hire law enforcement or military. Guess who does security at
embassies? That is right law enforcement and the military not TSA.

------
bokchoi
_"I believe what we have here is the beginning of the end of complacency. It
is now apparent to me that in the haste to ensure compliance with procedures
that are inconsistent if not inarticulable, TSA has hastened the likelihood of
failure."_

It's interesting this was written a year ago and only now are we starting to
exert our right to refuse.

------
TheSOB88
My guess as to why she's "randomly selected" so much is the way she holds
herself. Having been a cop, she probably has much different body language from
everyone else.

~~~
brc
I always get selected in about 90% of the times I travel.

I can think of no other reason than I look like I'll be easy to search and
they have a quota to fill. I also think it's because I often travel alone.

In no way could I be being racially or behaviourally profiled.

