CALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4140 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2232 times:
totally agree, why is it that airline employees seem to know more about security procedures than the actual screeners? Weren't these the creme of the crop who were tested and tested and re-tested again? Yes, but wait I forgot they were given the answers. And the funny thing is is that most the TSA employees now, were already screeners with Globe and Argenbright in the first place. The only difference now is that they get about 20 paid holidays a year being Gov't employees. You were right, they can be very unprofessional and unkowledgable, all who think they are the kings of aviation who are on power trips, I am extrememly disgusted with TSA and think we mine as well go back to the way it was, then we wont be paying these ridiculous security fees that are costing airlines millions and millions of dollars.
Contrails From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 1845 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2197 times:
I lost confidence a while back when TSA issued a statement saying that there is a greater chance of hijackings, then announced they were cutting back on air marshals. I also have some very real concerns about their ability to find weapons, such as box cutters, in carry on bags. My biggest concern is with cargo, which for the most part is not being checked at all.
2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2146 times:
Sadly this is what happens when you try to expand security overnight and staff it with low paid workers instead of security professionals. It may be cheaper in the short run, but over time you wind up with crap security, poor workers and a poor reputation.
Security decisions are being made by people with no background in policing or security and with politics and appearance taking priority over safety.
LImamura From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2132 times:
Having TSA at the airports is a waste of time and money. Half the time when I walk through those metal detectors they are not even looking at me or the top of the machine, which I guess tells them the level of metal objects I have on me.
TSA is so inconsistant, how could they be taken seriously?!
I mean, you could be carrying around a small pocket knife and maybe you have been fine going through 10 security check points, but then finally they catch it on the eleventh try. A couple months ago they took away a butane lighter that I had been carrying through security for all of 2002. What's with that.. I mean if 10 other TSA check points didn't have a problem with it why this one. That clearly showed me that they really don't follow the book, but rather they act on their own emotions or disgression. Possible if I went to the agent one row over then I would still have that lighter..
Kempa From Brazil, joined Aug 2003, 373 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2107 times:
Terror is a psychological aggression. The loss of 3000 lives is insignificant for the military capabilities of the United States, but the psychological damage was enormous. It created a feeling of vulnerability that Americans had never imagined.
The TSA works more or less on the same level, on two fronts. The first is that potential terrorists now know that the could be caught before performing an attack. Not that they will be caught, but they potentially could. Before 9/11, terrorists knew they would not be caught. The other level plays on the general public perception of air travel safety. It's the idea that "something" is being done to protect air travelers, who then feel safer and travel more.
Danny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3528 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2059 times:
Actually its more about hassling than protecting passengers. They find everything that you don't try to hide. But this kid proven that if you want to hide something - then no problem to get it to the aircraft.
Morover - he sent email to them stating that he has information about dangerous object placed on the aircrafts and NO ONE reacted. That is real scandal. As with Sept. 11 - they had information but they ignored them.
Jacques60 From France, joined Jul 2003, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2015 times:
Many thks for your explanations ! Now I understand why they asked me -quite rudely- to loosen my belt, take off my shoes and deliberately made me wait ! I had dared to grumble that 4 checks was overdoing it a little !
This was in ATL last July 20th.
Swafa30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1989 times:
As a cabin crewmember this subject is of particular interest to me. For the large portion of the traveling public that only travels occassionally, this subject is mostly academic but for those of us who work on the nations airliners this is an everyday concern.
Even if TSA were meeting or exceeding standards, you still have jets flying around with bellies full of largely unscreened cargo and airport employees on the apron area with access to aircraft that bypass the security checkpoint as a matter of course. Then there are the shoulder fired missles floating around out there.
Part of the problem is that this security game is filled with contradictions.
Qualified screening and screeners is expensive. But nobody wants to really spend the necessary money. The government and the airlines each think the other should pay and passengers end up getting nickeled and dimed to death with meaningless fees. Thorough screening is time consuming but everybody complains about having to be at the airport too early. We want terrorists caught before they can act but some also want complete privacy and others are offended by the perceived or real discrimination of profiling.
There are examples of carriers that have taken responsibility for the safety of their aircraft and passengers. El Al comes to mind. It only takes a brief look at their security procedures to know that the american public would never stand for the scrutiny.
Do the logistics of the massive US commercial travel system make true security impossible?
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4498 posts, RR: 19
Reply 19, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1964 times:
I also find that there are a larger percentage of disgruntled workers with "short-man syndrome" (i.e. an inferiority complex demonstrated by acting "bigger than" everyone else, acting like real jerks "just because they can") in this "profession" than in any other.
Jhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6206 posts, RR: 11
Reply 21, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1909 times:
Ok, for all of you security experts, instead of just saying how you don't like the TSA, why not give some constructive ideas as to how airport security can be tightened.
Well, we could start by screening air cargo. Next we could invest in technology such as explosive-proof baggage containers and better screening equipment. Finally, we could give every airline captain a gun and train him on how to use it.
Aside from that, perhaps we could evaluate our foreign policy and perhaps get to the root cause of the problem.
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
Cdgdtw From United States of America, joined May 2003, 200 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1895 times:
TSA - I know it has been said a thousand times but once again: Thousands Standing Around. I'm certain there is a way to be tough on security without having such an obvious waste of resources making security lines unbearable. As a crew member, we encounter hundreds of different stations every year. Some small stations in particular, insist we remove our shoes. Others tell me I cannot have my wine-opener (no knife). There is no consistency. A while ago at MBS in Michigan, I counted 13 screeners one morning at ONE lousy checkpoint. Is this the best way? Showing strength with so many uniforms walking around? This has to change.
AWA22 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1855 times:
They are not anyworse then what we had before. It is not possible to make air security 100% safe. If the airline is chosen as a target by the terrorist they will always find a way around security to do what they want to do. The only thing security can really do is deter something from happening.
"such as explosive-proof baggage containers"
This would only work on wide bodies. I would love to see you load a container onto a narrowbody such as a 717, DC-9, or 737.