Just a link:

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories...EMPLATE=DEFAULT

Matt

Now my day is complete .... is THIS how local governments are going to finance their share of the ever-upward spiraling homeland security costs?

"...nor be deprived of ...property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Bill of Rights, Amendment IV

Where is my just compensation? <img src="images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Were it that simple - the quote you cite is from the fifth Amendment (V, not IV), and the usual caveats about taking bits and pieces out of context apply... I'm not an "expert" in Constitutional law, but I reckon that IF anything applies to this circumstance, it would be the fourth amendment primarily. The fourth amendment deals with searches and siezures; the fifth is another animal entirely.

I think that nobody is angry about the security measures... people are just angry that their $50 tool is lost... I couldn;t care less about a nail file but I would be pretty much pissed off that somebody confiscated my sebenza and wave at the same time...

Matt

I'm angry about the "security" measures - because they have nothing to do with security.

Financing homeland security is the only explanation that makes sense. How else could anyone explain that it's unsafe to return your property so that you could return it to your vehicle or put it in your checked bag but it's ok to sell it back to you next week?

I don't think they can prevent you from returning an item to your car or putting it in your checked baggage if you wish to do so. Any security guard that tries to prevent this is overstepping his authority and running the risk of disciplinary action, I would think.

I'm afraid that's not true. They can and will confiscate knives from you.

They way it was put to me at the local airport is that once you present your knife or whatever for inspection, either in the tray or by magnetometer detection, you have surrendered it. I realize different airport security organisations probably interpret the rules as they see fit or you might get lucky and catch a guard who's capable of reasonable and individual thought. Pre-9/11 if you forgot you had a handgun in your briefcase you were arrested immediately, not given a chance to check the gun or put it in your car. Given the menacing nature of the average SAK, I guess you could just consider yourself lucky if all you had to do was surrender your property. Like some others on the forum, I think I'll just drive.

Ed

Well, I'm not a lawyer but I would argue that they have no legally justifiable reason to do so - their function is to prevent you from taking weapons aboard the aircraft, and if you take the knife and put it back in your car, they've done that.

Of course, as I understand it, the US Supreme Court has pretty much made a mockery of whole "protection against unreasonable search and seizure" thing, but I'd be curious to know if anyone has challenged this in court?

What I actually said was said prematurly and without justification. I said it from what I have read about US security. I apologise.

Yesterday I returned from a four day trip to Barcelona. I was stopped passing through security and my bag was searched. My coat was in my bag and I had accidently left my multitool in my coat pocket. Oops <img src="images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />. I asked if I could run back and put it in my car and they said it was fine <img src="images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />. So much for my earlier post.

On my way back through security in barcelona airport I was stopped through the metal detector. This was suprising as I had no zips and no metal on me, as far as I new, apart from my watch. He scanned me with the metal detector and it was from my small FAK in a ziplock bag in my pocket. The security guard just shrugged and let me pass. This was very puzzling as I was sure that there was no metal in there. After, I checked in the FAK and it turned out to be the foil rapping on the tiny cyalume light stick in there.

Pete, it makes you wonder why they don't all use the same procedures / scanners. I went to Brussels last year and a colleague had a pouch full of screwdrivers / multitools in his hand luggage. He was stopped, quite rightly, but they still let him go back and check the stuff in for hold luggage. I went to Luxembourg post 9/11 and managed, accidentally (really) to get a BCB survival tool there and back in my mobile phone case even though it was x-rayed. In March I flew to Brussels and took my knife / scissors out of my Urban Kit but still went through with the foil wraped scalpel blade. How inconsistent is that!

The security guard in Barcelona just shrugged off the first aid kit, but the bag was big enough to contain razor blades, scalpels or even a messy knife. Come to think of it I could have fitted any thin folding knife up to 3inchs long or a BCB survival card (I lost mine when I lost my wallet a couple of months ago <img src="images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />)

Last year when I was comming back from Africa next to me sat a French geology professor who just spend 6 months in the bush. To his leg he had straped an 11 inch blade, you should have seen how Dutch airport security freaked out hwen he was trying to board plane to Paris. The funnier part is that instead of plastic untencils we got full blow stainless steal knives and forks. God Bless Kenyan Airlines since we had steak for dinner that flight.

Matt

It has been awhile since I handled a case of this type, but I will endeavor to set out the law, as best I can recall, on airport searches. Airport searches are administrative searches and are an exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. The search must be designed to further a manifestly important governmental interest under circumstances where the program is reasonably tailored to further the governmental interest and where the intrusion on personal privacy or security is relatively slight in comparison to the interest served by the program. Further, those who are the subjects of an administrative search must consent to the search. Consent is typically implied. There is a sign posted warning you of the search, you pass the sign, you have consented to the search. You are free at any time prior to undergoing the search to return to your car and drop off your pocket knife. Once the search commences, you have consented to the process and it is reasonable to allow the process to run its full course.

Assuming the authorities have seized your pocket knife or multitool, you probably have little in the way of recourse, including under the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment. You are entering a sterile area and edged weapons and tools have been deemed to be either contraband or dangerous or deadly weapons. Either way, you are not allowed to have them in sterile areas and so you have probably forfeited your property rights.


atty_guy

Thanks for clarifying that. It makes sense that our beloved government has an interest in keeping its citizens safe (more tax dollars for them to spend!) but after having been hassled more than once by the ham-handed strong-arm types of the TSA, I have to wonder who really benefits from this spastic push for airport security other than a new class of federal employees?

I'd find that a more convincing argument if there were clearer guidelines about what the security guards can and cannot confiscate. But yes, anyone who tries to take a SAK or a Leatherman through security these days would probably have no legal recourse if the guards refused to return it. If it's something that's "permitted" by the official guidelines (like a round-tipped butter knife) but the guards decide they don't want to let you take it through, I'd expect them to give you the option.

I suspect, like anything else, it's pretty much up to the individual guard - and probably more than a little influenced by whether or not you addressed them as "jack-booted Storm Troopers" <img src="images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />