Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
TSA Sinks To An All Time Low  
User currently offlinekkephart13 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 16315 times:

This is straight up embarrassing on the TSA. I feel so bad for this woman...

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t3#...dying-woman-tsa-investigation.komo

89 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinecrapper1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2012, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 16257 times:

I was at STL this past week and was photographing a WN special paint aircraft. I felt a tug on my neck strap and it was a agent trying to take the bag off me to search it. It does not suprise me that they do this thing. Like any government agency it will never be run right like it should be.

User currently offlinelat41 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 470 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 16063 times:

Yet another TSA bashing thread. This gets so monotonous. There is always more to the story than sensational headlines. Lets stick to civil aviation.

User currently offlineN747PE From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 16050 times:

Careful with the term new all time low. The TSA is commited to going as low and their employesss can. Thank you W. for making such a awful curse that we all have to live with

User currently offlinekkephart13 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15909 times:

Quoting lat41 (Reply 2):
Yet another TSA bashing thread. This gets so monotonous. There is always more to the story than sensational headlines. Lets stick to civil aviation.

True, but i saw this, and had to share it.

Quoting N747PE (Reply 3):
Careful with the term new all time low. The TSA is commited to going as low and their employesss can. Thank you W. for making such a awful curse that we all have to live with

Embarassed to say this, I use to work for TSA at LAX, ONT, and PIT. It was a horrible job. Half those peoples "power" goes straight to their heads. I honestly hope one day, the badges get taken away from them.


User currently onlinePC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2433 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15888 times:

Quoting lat41 (Reply 2):

We don't have to point out TSA faults. They do it just fine all on their own. Not all TSA employees are incompetent, but most are a joke that get an attitude when they wear the uniform.

Quoting N747PE (Reply 3):
Careful with the term new all time low.

Indeed, they've proven they can go lower when we all think they've reached that level. Stay tuned - they'll go lower.



Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1155 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15864 times:

The TSA has disputed her account of events, but won't elaborate. There's two sides to every story.


Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12465 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15846 times:

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 1):
Like any government agency it will never be run right like it should be.

Hmm, the government university system I graduated from was run well enough to get me an excellent education that's served as the foundation of a career that's passing its 30th year and still going strong, with me directly and indirectly producing tax revenues that have paid for that education countless times over.

Personally, I'm glad it was not the University of Phoenix or some other for-profit diploma mill whose focus was on getting me a document that said 'diploma' on it at the maximum profit to themselves.

If you recall, or if you do your homework, it was a conscious decision to create TSA during the GWB era. The cross-party consensus at the time was that airlines and airports with their for-profit focus would be unsuitable as a provider of the increased security that was so obviously needed. It's clear that the TSA can be improved upon and that's what the goal should be, because the underlying premise is still true IMHO.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinesoon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15765 times:

Quoting lat41 (Reply 2):
Lets stick to civil aviation


Good point!...their is nothing civil about the little creeps in blue.


User currently offlinephxa340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 886 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15767 times:

Quoting lat41 (Reply 2):
Yet another TSA bashing thread. This gets so monotonous.

Then the TSA should stop giving us reasons to bash them ....


User currently offlineaviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1352 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15765 times:

Actually, TSA sank to what should have been its all time low a long, long time ago.

It will keep sinking to NEW lows for as long as the lazy US populace, together with its irresponsible media and recalcitrant airlines, allow it to happen.

I've written several columns and articles documenting the farce of TSA concourse security, a few examples of which are truly Kafka-esque.

This example is just one more.

PS

[Edited 2012-10-10 19:02:20]


Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
User currently offlineHOMsAR From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1180 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 15640 times:

Quoting kkephart13 (Reply 4):
Embarassed to say this, I use to work for TSA at LAX, ONT, and PIT. It was a horrible job. Half those peoples "power" goes straight to their heads. I honestly hope one day, the badges get taken away from them.

Was just thinking, there was a post in another thread asking why nobody from the TSA ever posts on here. Well, here you go.



I was raised by a cup of coffee.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4455 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 15611 times:

Sorry to ruin the party, but I have NEVER had a problem with any TSA employee. I don't fly all over the place, but I hit some pretty major cities:

LGA, JFK, EWR
LAX
ORD
MIA
MSY
PHL
SJU


User currently offlinepicarus From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 299 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 15431 times:

Quoting N747PE (Reply 3):
Thank you W. for making such a awful curse that we all have to live with

If I remember correctly, W. was opposed to the creation of a federal transportation security agency. Although he buckled under public and political pressure, we really have Congress to thank for that mess.

I have no doubt this post will get me on the no fly list.  


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7477 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 15358 times:

I feel blessed that I never had a run in with the T.S.A. given the amount of flying I've had.

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 9):
Then the TSA should stop giving us reasons to bash them ....

  



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinedcann40 From United States of America, joined Sep 2012, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 15170 times:

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 1):
I was at STL this past week and was photographing a WN special paint aircraft. I felt a tug on my neck strap and it was a agent trying to take the bag off me to search it

And your reaction was?


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5601 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 15079 times:

Quoting lat41 (Reply 2):
Lets stick to civil aviation.

What gets tiring is hearing that line in every single TSA thread. Like it or not, TSA is an integral part of civil aviation. If you have a problem with that, hit the little button that says "Suggest Deletion". If the mods agree with you, they will lock the thread.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 6):
The TSA has disputed her account of events, but won't elaborate. There's two sides to every story.

In my experience, when one side refuses to elaborate on a claim, it generally means they're lying.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 7):

If you recall, or if you do your homework, it was a conscious decision to create TSA during the GWB era. The cross-party consensus at the time was that airlines and airports with their for-profit focus would be unsuitable as a provider of the increased security that was so obviously needed. It's clear that the TSA can be improved upon and that's what the goal should be, because the underlying premise is still true IMHO.

I think the only people who want to go back to the way it was either have a financial interest in security companies or just plain don't remember what it was like. I am in the latter crowd, although several people have explained to me just how bad it was.

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 1):
I felt a tug on my neck strap and it was a agent trying to take the bag off me to search it.

You should've pressed charges. Not even a cop is allowed to do that to you without announcing their presence unless they have a reasonable belief that you are about to commit a crime.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1714 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 12773 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting lat41 (Reply 2):

Yet another TSA bashing thread. This gets so monotonous. There is always more to the story than sensational headlines. Lets stick to civil aviation.


If you want to stick it to civil aviation, keep the TSA. The whole DHS needs to be abolished.


User currently offlinemd80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 12422 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 16):
I think the only people who want to go back to the way it was either have a financial interest in security companies or just plain don't remember what it was like. I am in the latter crowd, although several people have explained to me just how bad it was.

Let's go back further to how "good" it was, before everyone starts to think that this security "theater" has always been the norm.

Back in the days (80s) there was no "airside" ... one could enter the airport and walk right up to a gate, take a seat and watch airplanes taxiing around, gate operations, etc with no intention of flying that day. Families could gather 50 feet from where the passengers would leave the jet bridge, and not a half a mile away beyond "security". They could gather and wish their loved one's well and watch them, with tears flowing, until they disappeared 'round the bend on the jet bridge.

Travelers were treated with the utmost respect and reverence, as they should be (being the sole "customer" of passenger airlines) not despicable suspicious wonks one eye blink away from lighting their underwear or shoes on fire. I'm freaking sick of this farce, the weak link in "security" has never been with the customers, it's been everywhere BUT the customers and their belongings. Yet throngs of people go through these "security" checkpoints and literally give their tacit approval to this farce by their continued patronage of the airlines that support it. When will YOU stop flying? When the fabled TASER wristbands are attached to you at the TSA checkpoint? Will you then say "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear"?

It was not al Queda that utterly ruined my one true love, it was someone else entirely.


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12465 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 12089 times:

Quoting aviateur (Reply 10):
I've written several columns and articles documenting the farce of TSA concourse security, a few examples of which are truly Kafka-esque.

Maybe you can write about what corrective processes exist (if any) within the TSA, and if any of these corrective processes have produced results.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineFrostbite From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 11826 times:

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 18):
Travelers were treated with the utmost respect and reverence, as they should be (being the sole "customer" of passenger airlines) not despicable suspicious wonks one eye blink away from lighting their underwear or shoes on fire.

Come on, the security experience sucked long before the 9/11-era. Is it just me, or do people seem to forget what airport security was really like back in the pre-9/11 era? Most checkpoints were manned by contract security personnel that were poorly trained, poorly disciplined, and poorly paid. For example, any flyers here remember when Argenbright handled security at ATL?

Though I too object to some of the indignities that are hard-wired into the security process these days...on balance, I think TSA personnel exhibit a much more professional demeanor than the contract outfits they replaced. Of course there are exceptions, that's what these threads are all about, big picture be damned.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13023 posts, RR: 100
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 11472 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Frostbite (Reply 20):

Come on, the security experience sucked long before the 9/11-era. Is it just me, or do people seem to forget what airport security was really like back in the pre-9/11 era?

Yes. I remember walking family to the gate prior to a flight or greeting friends and relatives as they returned. I could show up at LAX 45 minutes before a flight, check a bag, and make the flight! At small airports (BDL, ICT), most of my friends didn't both showing up until 15 minutes before the flight for a day trip. Walk through and after a quick scan onto the plane.

And somehow with all those people parking at the metered spots traffic was better at LAX with more passengers flying!

Quoting Frostbite (Reply 20):
I think TSA personnel exhibit a much more professional demeanor than the contract outfits they replaced.

Agreed. But when one could lock suitcases, less stuff disappeared. There are two sides.

I personally believe all the security theater is diverting tourism from the USA.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4218 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10300 times:

Quoting lat41 (Reply 2):
Yet another TSA bashing thread. This gets so monotonous. There is always more to the story than sensational headlines. Lets stick to civil aviation.

This is civil aviation, or do you think it should be in another forum?

Quoting aviateur (Reply 10):
Actually, TSA sank to what should have been its all time low a long, long time ago.

They keep digging the hole deeper though...

Quoting N62NA (Reply 12):

Sorry to ruin the party, but I have NEVER had a problem with any TSA employee. I don't fly all over the place, but I hit some pretty major cities:

LGA, JFK, EWR
LAX
ORD
MIA
MSY
PHL
SJU

I agree with you, I fly all the time and find that there is rarely an issue at the airports I use. I have never personally encountered any issues with the TSA. I find the ones in Hawaii very pleasant and they do their jobs with professionalism and dignity for the passengers. I take these isolated incidents and put them in my mind, but really on a day to day basis, they are just doing their jobs, most are able to do it without there being any issues and on occasions there might be a problem, but generally they are doing the governments bidding in a professional manner. Granted they don't enhance security but do give the impression that they are "keeping you safe" through the biggest waste of money the government can do on an on going basis.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineSEA From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 235 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10087 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 22):
I agree with you, I fly all the time and find that there is rarely an issue at the airports I use. I have never personally encountered any issues with the TSA. I find the ones in Hawaii very pleasant and they do their jobs with professionalism and dignity for the passengers. I take these isolated incidents and put them in my mind, but really on a day to day basis, they are just doing their jobs, most are able to do it without there being any issues and on occasions there might be a problem, but generally they are doing the governments bidding in a professional manner. Granted they don't enhance security but do give the impression that they are "keeping you safe" through the biggest waste of money the government can do on an on going basis.

I've never had any issues at all either. In fact, I've made notes of employees in DEN, COS, and SEA who were very outgoing and kind. And many times they are more friendly than FAs on some US legacy carriers... I will admit a few airports (ORD, ATL) where the TSA agents have been a bit cold, but still nothing unprofessional.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1821 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 9899 times:

Those who defend TSA in every thread are they perhaps employed by TSA or tools of the government?

User currently offlineg1zmonc From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 25, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9773 times:

TSA can not possibly sink to new LOWS, they are already there, I try to tolerate them, recently I took a reburfished computer to my x , I was worried about going thru security with it. I had more trouble with my keys and wallet than I did with a Gateway Tower and a 19 Dell LCD montior. Both those items went thru the xray machine on the belt but when my keys and wallet came thru the TSA agent asked if they were mine he advised me they needed more screening. I said whatever. So they wiped both my keys and wallet with the bomb scanning device and said they were okay but never touched the computer or the monitor. What a JOKE they are.

User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12465 posts, RR: 25
Reply 26, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9705 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 24):
Those who defend TSA in every thread are they perhaps employed by TSA or tools of the government?

So, you're suggesting it's that simple a problem with that simple a motivation?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinegsoflyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 1093 posts, RR: 1
Reply 27, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9738 times:

It's really no different than Police or the like. Most are generally polite and are just working to the end of their day doing there job. But, people generally don't remember people that give the appearance of doing their job's right. What people see and remember are the hassles, inconvenience, uncomfortable situations, tongue lashings and general bossy "do what I say" attitude that some of the workers give.

In GSO, TUL, CMH, IAD, RDU, CLT, DTW I have found the staff fairly pleasant, if not downright pleasant. At EWR, ORD and ATL however, I have consistently had horrible experiences. This could be related to a number of factors.

The problem is, when it was private security, you could say that security at airport XX is horrible because the event and people are isolated. However, the TSA is now national and have a national image. And if people remember the bad, they remember all for being bad. I avoid Chicago like the plague because of how TSA acts there.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8491 posts, RR: 2
Reply 28, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9696 times:

The airline passenger bill of rights should limit what TSA is allowed to do. Let them search pax and their bags for weapons and explosive devices. That seems good. But random interrogations etc, no. TSA should only have the power to deny, or even delay, boarding if weapons or explosive devices are found on the person. Otherwise they should leave people alone.

User currently offlineSmittyOne From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 29, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9385 times:

Quoting g1zmonc (Reply 25):
So they wiped both my keys and wallet with the bomb scanning device and said they were okay but never touched the computer or the monitor. What a JOKE they are.

I'm not a security guru but this might not be as dumb as you think.

'Sniffing' the things that you handle a lot (wallet/keys) has a better chance of detecting whether or not you've been playing with bomb making materials. The result of which might be in your checked luggage.

Not saying that the whole thing is or isn't a valid measure, just why they might have checked your keys but not your computer.


User currently offlineJHCRJ700 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 8441 times:

Quoting aviateur (Reply 10):
Actually, TSA sank to what should have been its all time low a long, long time ago.

It will keep sinking to NEW lows for as long as the lazy US populace, together with its irresponsible media and recalcitrant airlines, allow it to happen.

I've written several columns and articles documenting the farce of TSA concourse security, a few examples of which are truly Kafka-esque.

Where may I find them? I'd love to read them. (No sarcasm here I would actually really like to read them).

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 16):
unless they have a reasonable belief that you are about to commit a crime

And there my friend is the problem. They would say some crap about taking pictures of planes shows your about to commit a crime of some kind.



RUSH
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4455 posts, RR: 7
Reply 31, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 8437 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 24):
Those who defend TSA in every thread are they perhaps employed by TSA or tools of the government?

I don't know if you are referring to me or not - I'm not aware that I have "defended TSA in every thread" - but when I see an entire group of people being disparaged, I feel the need to speak up. And if by sharing my experiences with TSA (which have been good) makes me a "tool of government" in your eyes, then I suggest you get some glasses or contact lenses.


User currently offlinecanadianpylon From Canada, joined May 2003, 310 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 8264 times:

Quoting lat41 (Reply 2):
Yet another TSA bashing thread. This gets so monotonous. There is always more to the story than sensational headlines. Lets stick to civil aviation.

If the TSA would stop giving us reasons to bash them, then we could discuss other facets of civil aviation. I have to admit that reading yet another article about the incompetence of the TSA is like looking at a car accident on the highway. But, everyone slows down to take a look at the flipped car and the firetrucks.



Always looking for the longest route with the most transfers.
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2389 posts, RR: 13
Reply 33, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7929 times:

Quoting HOMsAR (Reply 11):
Was just thinking, there was a post in another thread asking why nobody from the TSA ever posts on here. Well, here you go.

I was that guy.  
Quoting kkephart13 (Reply 4):
Embarassed to say this, I use to work for TSA at LAX, PIT.

In a community like this one, there is always room for a repentant sinner.  


David

[Edited 2012-10-11 14:28:29]


Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1714 posts, RR: 1
Reply 34, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7700 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 18):
Back in the days (80s) there was no "airside" ... one could enter the airport and walk right up to a gate, take a seat and watch airplanes taxiing around, gate operations, etc with no intention of flying that day.

Well there was security in airport beginning about 1971-72. Up until 9-12-2001 many airport allowed non-passengers to go to that gate. I dont see why this still cant be allowed, aside from making lines longer.


User currently offlineJHCRJ700 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 7030 times:

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 34):

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 18):
Back in the days (80s) there was no "airside" ... one could enter the airport and walk right up to a gate, take a seat and watch airplanes taxiing around, gate operations, etc with no intention of flying that day.

Well there was security in airport beginning about 1971-72. Up until 9-12-2001 many airport allowed non-passengers to go to that gate. I dont see why this still cant be allowed, aside from making lines longer.

Some of my fondest childhood memories were when my parents would take me to the airport and literally let me lead them around walking from gate to gate, terminal to terminal. Too bad those days are loooooong gone.



RUSH
User currently offlineskywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 6441 times:

I'm amused reading so many people have never had issues with TSA. I experienced 10 invasive pat downs in a row immediately after they replaced private security in '02. They all said it was random, maybe one or two but not ten, that's just a lie later proven. The first TSA screener I ever met at CMH was extremely verbally abusive and shouted at me loudly, even in front of airport officials watching TSA's first week on the job. My "crime" in his mind was he asked me repeatedly to empty my pockets. I was clearly being uncoopertative by "lying" which he screamed at me when I said I'd emptied them already. Eventually we determined it was the button in the back pocket when he demanded to know what he was feeling in that pocket. When I explained he shouted HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO KNOW THAT!?. One of the airport officials followed me to my gate to talk to me about what had just happened. My flight was boarding, I didn't want to miss it, and thought it's just an isolated incident surely they'll get better. I've always regretted not talking to that man because no TSA didn't get better.

After getting invasive pat downs 10 times in a row that every screener swore I was randomly selected for I demanded to know what was going on. Only when I wanted their name and number to file a complaint was I told it was because I was wearing a sweater and it's baggy. It was winter go figure I'd wear a sweater. They weren't a banned item and nowhere then on TSA's website did it say anything about baggy clothes. It does say something about that now but at the time clearly I was being lied to. I doubt I'm the only one that got that treatment back then.

I wish I could say that screener at CMH was the only one who yelled at me. I've had a lot of them over the years. Once I went thru security at COS with my brother. He had a plane ticket to IAH and I had one to PHX. My brother went first and the guy was professional with my brother but was fairly nasty to me. You know honestly in that situation I would understand getting a "random" but no he was just nasty to me. Two people, possibly related with same last name, acting like they know each other I would have understood it could be seen as a red flag. If I were up to no good did he scare me straight? I had no secondary inspection of any kind just surly nasty TSA experience. The only thing I can even think of that may have set him off is my brother showed him a Texas DL and I showed him my passport. He turned nasty immediately after seeing it but made no comment about it or that I was doing anything wrong. I never show TSA my DL, ever, ever, ever. I've never had TSA question me about why I gave them a passport but I've seen a lot of them make a face like I'm just being a jerk to them. When I was a kid there was a man arrested breaking into houses who knew they were empty because he wrote down people's addresses on their luggage at the airport. I only put my name and phone numbers on my bag and I never show TSA my DL. What are the odds they'd remember my address? Yeah almost zero, but it is zero if they never see it. Sorry TSA but you've had a chronic problem with theft since the beginning. I think they know that's why I'm doing that and I think a few decide not to be professional about it.

Alas I really miss the days I could go to the airport. I love flying and on a few occassions would go way early when I had to pick someone up just to wander around the airport from gate to gate seeing the planes come and go. It really is a shame that will never come back. Airlines wanted an ID check in the 90's to crack down on frequent flyer fraud. I'd heard this several times in the early 90's but no airline wanted to be the first, they wanted the government to require it. After TWA 800 crashed that was one of the security measures that came into being, just in case. By making TSA check it airlines don't have to slow down boarding and now a machine can issue your boarding pass. So wandering the concourses without a ticket will never come back even if terrorists change their ways and everyone likes the US suddenly overnight.

Ok so maybe that never affects those of you who only want to be at the airport when you have to be right? Guess again. I was on a flight to MCI once diverted to OMA when three thunderheads parked themselves over MCI and didn't move for hours. After landing at OMA we were let off the plane and all the conessions on the concourse were closed. I had no idea, and still don't know, what TSA policy is on how do you reclear security if you exit a secured area in this case. My boarding pass says Kansas City on it, not Omaha, why would TSA let me back in? They'd probably refer me to the airline desk and who knows if they were open that late. In hindsight I could have asked the screeners before exiting, maybe I'd have been given an answer. I wrote TSA three separate times asking what their policy was in this event. Every time my concern was handled as a complaint and since no one did anything wrong it went nowhere. I even had the head of TSA at OMA email me back on my third attempt at an answer and they did seem sincere at my "complaint" and concern I wasn't being answered but guess they determined no one did anything wrong so they never wrote me back with an answer either. Anyone know what the policy is? I sure don't know and they don't want to tell me.

I want to be clear I am not opposed to airport security, unfortunately it is needed. When I was fresh out of high school I worked for Wackenhut Security (google them for some horror stories) doing screening for Eastern, Braniff and a few other carries at MCI one summer before college. I loved that job even though it was minimum wage. I have a cousin who until recently worked for TSA at CID. The problem isn't that security is there. The problem is the stupid rules, the lack of accountibility, the theft, the attitude that they can abuse the public and hide behind the rules to get away with it. The times I've asked questions that were legitimate concerns like above either I get the attitude we don't have to answer to you or I'm ignored. I think we all knew they'd have teething problems in the beginning but they haven't gotten better, they've gotten worse. There aren't a lot of good excuses for some of their behavior and the lows they sink to keep getting lower.


User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6377 times:

Quoting gsoflyer (Reply 27):
At EWR, ORD and ATL however, I have consistently had horrible experiences.

One of my bad experiences was at EWR. I was doing one of my usual runs to MYR to see family and I had a model plane in my bag as a gift for somebody. The TSA agent apparently thought it was a dagger and left my bag in the machine longer. As it came out of the machine, I grabbed it, but was yelled at to STOP! from a TSA agent who had been observing my bag from another line. He cameover, scolded me for what I did, even though the bag was at the end of the line and ready to be picked up! He made me put the bag back into the machine and have it screened again because he didn't think the plane was actually a plane! It was humiliating being yelled at in front of a crowded EWR security checkpoint when the guy wasn't even working at the lane I was at. He was two over and ran over, causing a scene. This is, however, one of the only bad TSA experiences I have had. Mostly it's just dirty looks and sarcastic remarks, which don;t bother me that much. Some agents, however, worry me a bit. After I left the checkpoint at EWR, there was a seemingly abonded bag laying on a window sill, so, just to be safe, I alerted one of the agents. He turned his head halfway from his phone and told me to tell an agent near the bag. So, I found somebody else, who looked at the bag, and once I went on my way, he went on his! Didn't even give it any attention. I stopped at a nearby restaurant-type thing, (Can't remember the name), but the bag was in my sight for five minutes as it just sat there, unattended.

I know that most TSA Agents are trying to do their job right, and they are. But there are some that shouldn't be doing this job if they don't to do it right.


The TSA had no right to do what they did to this woman. If she checked up with the airline on what she had to do, why would there have been a legitamate problem? I don't know what these Agents thought she would:

A. Have running into her body through tubes
B. Have in a labeled medical bad with saline water in it

This is appalling and the agents who were involved in this should lose their jobs immediately.


User currently offlineaviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1352 posts, RR: 11
Reply 38, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6345 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 12):
Sorry to ruin the party, but I have NEVER had a problem with any TSA employee. I don't fly all over the place, but I hit some pretty major cities:

It's not about "having a problem" with a specific employee. It's about the whole approach that TSA takes to passenger security. TSA guards can be the nicest people in the world; that doesn't excuse their protocols, or the fact that, for the most part, they are wasting our time and tax money.

PS



Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
User currently offlineaviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1352 posts, RR: 11
Reply 39, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6343 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 19):
Maybe you can write about what corrective processes exist (if any) within the TSA, and if any of these corrective processes have produced results.

I have. Visit my website and read my security manifesto.

PS



Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6287 posts, RR: 33
Reply 40, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6309 times:

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 1):

I am skeptical. That would not be a legal or sensible thing to do.

As to the original situation she probably should have contacted the TSA rather than Alaska Airlines.



Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6311 times:

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 1):
I was at STL this past week and was photographing a WN special paint aircraft. I felt a tug on my neck strap and it was a agent trying to take the bag off me to search it. It does not suprise me that they do this thing. Like any government agency it will never be run right like it should be.

Wow, that guy had some nerve. Where in the terminal where you? Near security, or just there spotting? Either way, not really the best approach by the guy.

Also, just to be clear, you meant he tugged at your camera bag, right?


User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 1936 posts, RR: 1
Reply 42, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 6161 times:

Don't let one bad apple spoil the bunch... TSA actually prevents harmful things from getting on airplanes, shocking right? You hear about it every once in a while. Just because one officer has a power trip doesn't mean all the agents are that way. Now CBP on the other hand...


Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlineskywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 43, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6134 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 42):
Now CBP on the other hand...

Ironically when I had my Global Entry interview so I could get into the country faster and hopefully use TSA Pre Check I walked away thinking that is the nicest CBP officer I have ever talked to, and I mean ever! Yeah they're usually professional with nasty lurking right below the surface that comes out a lot. So I've never ever had one nice and it was kind of a shock. The TSA rep I talked to during the interview was extremely defensive, evasive and dissappeared quick. All I had asked her was what might disqualify me from TSA Pre Check. She literally said I was asking her for national secrets. Ok well yeah probably some of what would get you disqualified probably is secret. However I'd like to think committing a felony or making Blogger Bob's items confiscated this week post ought to get you bounced and that shouldn't be a secret at all.


User currently offlines5daw From Slovenia, joined May 2011, 253 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5850 times:

As a frequent flyer so far my experience with TSA and other security agencies (I mostly fly in EMEA) has been positive.
Like in any job there are individuals who are not professional and they hit the headlines.

Of course, headlines like "Thousands of TSA agents screened 3 million passengers in a day with no incidents" is not really newsworthy.

So, don't let a couple of incidents twist your perception of reality.


User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 45, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5742 times:

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 34):
I dont see why this still cant be allowed, aside from making lines longer.

...and the crowding of the gates that would result. The gates are already crowded enough.

I was in line for TSA at JFK...the elderly Korean lady in front of me was asked ''What's your name?'' She didn't respond...''WHAT'S YOUR NAME?'' I said, ''If she didn't understand English the first time, yelling won't make her understand any better'' Then the agent yells ''SECONDARYYYY'' The other TSA agent tells me that ''The airline has selected you for additional screening.'' I said ''REALLY? Where's the code on the boarding pass? I work the check-in counters for this airline, I personally put the code on the boarding passes. MY airline didn't select me for screening, YOU DID...you're just trying to delay me and deflect blame from the TSA and instead, lay blame on the airlines.'' During the process, he became friendlier and eventually admitted that he lied...only because he knew he'd been busted.



Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 1936 posts, RR: 1
Reply 46, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5618 times:

Quoting skywaymanaz (Reply 43):
Ironically when I had my Global Entry interview so I could get into the country faster and hopefully use TSA Pre Check I walked away thinking that is the nicest CBP officer I have ever talked to, and I mean ever! Yeah they're usually professional with nasty lurking right below the surface that comes out a lot. So I've never ever had one nice and it was kind of a shock. The TSA rep I talked to during the interview was extremely defensive, evasive and dissappeared quick. All I had asked her was what might disqualify me from TSA Pre Check. She literally said I was asking her for national secrets. Ok well yeah probably some of what would get you disqualified probably is secret. However I'd like to think committing a felony or making Blogger Bob's items confiscated this week post ought to get you bounced and that shouldn't be a secret at all.

Do CBP agents have high turnover? I worked in IAH's FIS in the summers of 2011 and 2012 and CBP in '11 were just a bunch of pricks. Very seldom would I enteract with a nice/cool agent. In '12, there were more cool agents, but still a lot of assholes. And new faces I might add.



Go coogs! \n//
User currently offline135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 412 posts, RR: 4
Reply 47, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5582 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 9):
Then the TSA should stop giving us reasons to bash them ....

Precisely! This reminds me of the TSA "Agent" that opened up the jar of human remains, stuck her finger in it, stirred it around, dropped bits of it on the floor and laughed at the person trying to pick them back up.

When there's a new "low"...does it mean they are actually trying/striving for "new low" attention? LOL

I realize we don't pay them a lot, HOWEVER...take pride in your job and do the best you can! Recently, here in RAP we had some of our military deployers going through the airport ( just like many others before them), and TSA (Thousands Standing Around) actually stopped the line for 15+ minutes because they couldn't figure out what was in the bags (military items and personal items...same as before) and made many people miss their flights...including the deploying personnel.

So, while there are only a select few that "hate" the TSA haters... as has been said; "TSA should stop giving us reasons to bash them"!!!

Also, since the majority of these reports have the TSA in the "no comment" response...doesn't that show their lack of give-a-sh*t about doing things right or actually showing respect to the passengers???

Regards,
135Mech


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4218 posts, RR: 1
Reply 48, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5547 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 24):

Those who defend TSA in every thread are they perhaps employed by TSA or tools of the government?

I am not a tool nor do I work for the government. Every day millions of people travel through airports and have no problem. The story that is referred to is because it will get ratings and in the U.S. people as you can see above have issues with the TSA.

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 1):
I felt a tug on my neck strap and it was a agent trying to take the bag off me to search it. It does not suprise me that they do this thing. Like any government agency it will never be run right like it should be.

And you did not know why you should be targeted? Why would you question their motives when all you have to do is act civil and show what you had in your bag. I assume you were at an American airport, where security was finally brought up to world standards. I have traveled all over the world and you think that the TSA is bad? Try taking pictures at CAN or PEK. You think that they would just pull at your shoulder strap? Heck, try TLV, see what they do.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4455 posts, RR: 7
Reply 49, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5521 times:

Quoting skywaymanaz (Reply 36):
The problem is the stupid rules, the lack of accountibility, the theft, the attitude that they can abuse the public and hide behind the rules to get away with it. The times I've asked questions that were legitimate concerns like above either I get the attitude we don't have to answer to you or I'm ignored.

I'm sorry you had so many problems. It was either bad luck or perhaps something in your attitude or approach towards them that raised a flag.

Now, as to your point that I quoted above, what you describe is unfortunately the way our Federal government is set up. There are literally hundreds of thousands of non-U.S. citizens who go through horrendous treatment at U.S. embassies when trying to obtain a visa to come to the USA and they are treated as less-than-human and are "presumed to have illegal immigration intent" (look it up, it's actually worded that way in the US Immigration law).

We have been trying now for 3 years to bring an EU citizen to the USA under the H-1B visa program. He doesn't have a "terrorist sounding name" and hasn't even gotten a parking ticket ever in his life. Yet the U.S. embassy over in Norway refuses to answer any inquiries from him OR from me (U.S. citizen) regarding why they have him in "administrative processing" for the past 2 years!

So this attitude of Federal government employees being "untouchable" and "ignoring questions" and basically treating WE THE TAXPAYERS as an annoyance and ignoring us is symptomatic of what a monstrosity of a huge bureaucracy breeds.


Quoting aviateur (Reply 38):
It's not about "having a problem" with a specific employee. It's about the whole approach that TSA takes to passenger security. TSA guards can be the nicest people in the world; that doesn't excuse their protocols, or the fact that, for the most part, they are wasting our time and tax money.

Yes, I agree in that in general our Federal government is totally out of control in many areas, and TSA, CBP / Immigration are at the top of the list.

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 42):
Don't let one bad apple spoil the bunch... TSA actually prevents harmful things from getting on airplanes, shocking right? You hear about it every once in a while. Just because one officer has a power trip doesn't mean all the agents are that way. Now CBP on the other hand...

I addressed CBP above. I agree with your other comments re: TSA.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5601 posts, RR: 6
Reply 50, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 5475 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 42):
TSA actually prevents harmful things from getting on airplanes

The numbers show they miss over half of the items in so-called red drills. So no, they don't stop squat.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4455 posts, RR: 7
Reply 51, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 5451 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 50):
The numbers show they miss over half of the items in so-called red drills. So no, they don't stop squat.

Taking you at your word re: the miss rate. That would indicate that they DO stop harmful things from getting on the airplanes up to 50% of the time.


User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2389 posts, RR: 13
Reply 52, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 5379 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 51):
Taking you at your word re: the miss rate. That would indicate that they DO stop harmful things from getting on the airplanes up to 50% of the time.

Meh, just organize several terror cells that don't know each other. 50% of them will be busted, the others will get through.

Just a suggestion to the advanced jihadist.



David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4455 posts, RR: 7
Reply 53, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5286 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 52):
Meh, just organize several terror cells that don't know each other. 50% of them will be busted, the others will get through.

Just a suggestion to the advanced jihadist.

Well, I just think you're being a bit unfair. Can the Federal government do a better job. Most definitely. But because it's the Federal government running the show, we shouldn't get our expectations up.  


User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2389 posts, RR: 13
Reply 54, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 5139 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 53):
Well, I just think you're being a bit unfair. Can the Federal government do a better job. Most definitely. But because it's the Federal government running the show, we shouldn't get our expectations up.

Yes. I was joking.  

But government agencies can be efficient. I think the problem with TSA is that they haven't decided to do anything that provides the maximum amount security for the smallest amount of money.

We have to keep in mind that since 9/11, there have been the following fatal commercial aviation accidents in the U.S., with 385 people dead:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_587
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Midwest_Flight_5481
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comair_Flight_191
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407

One could argue that compared to these accidents 100 dead by terrorist attacks per 10 years would be acceptable losses, and so the TSA is already doing a decent job when the amount of lives saved is the yardstick. But they could still do the same job with less passengers being harassed each day, and even without the costly full-body scanners.

Aviation is safe enough today.


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlinesoon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 55, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 5130 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 24):
Those who defend TSA in every thread are they perhaps employed by TSA or tools of the government?

Very Good!...Bravo


User currently offlineaviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1352 posts, RR: 11
Reply 56, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5035 times:

Quoting JHCRJ700 (Reply 30):
Where may I find them? I'd love to read them. (No sarcasm here I would actually really like to read them).

Visit my website. I can't run links to it here, but you can find it if you click on my profile. Thanks. PS



Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
User currently offlineaviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1352 posts, RR: 11
Reply 57, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5011 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 42):
TSA actually prevents harmful things from getting on airplanes, shocking right?

Like what? A fork? A screwdriver? A boxcutter?

From my book...

As conventional wisdom has it, the 9/11 terrorists exploited a weakness in airport security by smuggling aboard boxcutters. But conventional wisdom is wrong. It was not a failure of airport security that allowed those men to hatch their takeover scheme. It was, instead, a failure of national security – a breakdown of communication and oversight at the FBI and CIA levels. What the men actually exploited was a weakness in our mindset -- a set of presumptions based on the decades-long track record of hijackings and how they were expected to unfold. In years past, a hijacking meant a diversion to Beirut or Havana, with hostage negotiations and standoffs; crews were accordingly trained in the concept of “passive resistance.” The presence of boxcutters was merely incidental. They could have used anything -- onboard silverware, knives fashioned from plastic, a broken bottle wrapped in tape -- particularly when coupled with the bluff of having a bomb. The weapon that mattered was the intangible one: the element of surprise.

Everything is different now, but much of TSA's mindset is still pre-9/11.

TSA has taken silverware from me, more than once, while I was on duty. They will actually stop the line to take a fork or butter knife away from a uniformed airline pilot, even as these same items are dispensed on board planes. How insane is that?

Forget sharp objects. The focus ought to be almost entirely on bombs and explosives. Little else matters.


PS



Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 1936 posts, RR: 1
Reply 58, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4847 times:

Quoting aviateur (Reply 57):
Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 42):
TSA actually prevents harmful things from getting on airplanes, shocking right?

Like what? A fork? A screwdriver? A boxcutter?

I heard on the radio once that TSA confiscated 22 firearms, loaded or not, I don't want to know, at the check point in January and February alone, in Houston.
As someone who is part of the travelling pubilc, a former airport employee, an aspiring commercial pilot, and whose own mother works at an airport, it brings comfort to me to know that the measures that are in place to keep everyone safe are actually working and that the tax payers money isn't just going to some 1-in-a-million jackass TSA agent's paycheck.

Do I hate the inconvenience of long security lines? Yes. Do I think TSA should be reformed? Hell yes. But do I think all of this is a necessary evil? Of course I do.



Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5601 posts, RR: 6
Reply 59, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4776 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 51):
That would indicate that they DO stop harmful things from getting on the airplanes up to 50% of the time.

Are you suggesting that's something to be proud of?

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 58):
As someone who is part of the travelling pubilc, a former airport employee, an aspiring commercial pilot, and whose own mother works at an airport, it brings comfort to me to know that the measures that are in place to keep everyone safe are actually working

Maybe you should read some of the posts here: they are most certainly NOT working. We've had several instances this year of people returning to the checkpoints when they find they forgot their loaded gun in their bags. How many others decided just to keep quiet about it?

As a member of the traveling public, current airport employee, and Private Pilot: I am not comforted one bit the measures in place. They need to stop with the scare-mongering and order-barking and get back to basic, smart searches of people and their belongings.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 1936 posts, RR: 1
Reply 60, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4750 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 59):
As a member of the traveling public, current airport employee, and Private Pilot: I am not comforted one bit the measures in place. They need to stop with the scare-mongering and order-barking and get back to basic, smart searches of people and their belongings.

That's why I said TSA needs to be reformed. Also, the stuff they have caught is better than nothing at all  optimist 

[Edited 2012-10-12 23:38:37]


Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlineskywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 61, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4699 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 48):

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 1):
I felt a tug on my neck strap and it was a agent trying to take the bag off me to search it. It does not suprise me that they do this thing. Like any government agency it will never be run right like it should be.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 48):
And you did not know why you should be targeted? Why would you question their motives when all you have to do is act civil and show what you had in your bag.

Umm clearly you missed the point that what the screener did was legally an assault. You do not, even as a Police officer (with very few exceptions), have the right to approach someone from behind and tug on their belongings like that. That screener could very easily have said something along the lines of, "Excuse me Sir, I need to take a look at your bag." That is how you handle that regardless of whether you are law enforcement, TSA or private security.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 49):
We have been trying now for 3 years to bring an EU citizen to the USA under the H-1B visa program. He doesn't have a "terrorist sounding name" and hasn't even gotten a parking ticket ever in his life. Yet the U.S. embassy over in Norway refuses to answer any inquiries from him OR from me (U.S. citizen) regarding why they have him in "administrative processing" for the past 2 years!

Don't get me started on Customs and Immigration. I'm Mexican-American myself, maybe that's what is wrong with my approach or another reason I get mean looks with my US Passport. I have no problem with a policy requiring legal entry into the country. The problem is it is harder to legally enter if you are a Mexican citizen then from almost any other country. A friend of mine married a Mexican national, her mother is a widow and the US won't issue her a visa to visit and refuses to say way. They even got a Senator to pressure for a visa and it is still refused. I'm sure it's not to hard to guess why they're refusing it. She's an elderly widow and they figure if we let her in she'll never leave. Customs and Immigration will never say that, but they're happy to keep taking her money every time she applies, deny the visa and keep her cash. That's the problem and that's where the real racism is in the process, not the legal border enforcement. I'm sure your friend is dealing with the same burden. They'll keep taking his money, saying no and laughing behind his back.


User currently offlineYankeesFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4683 times:

Quoting aviateur (Reply 57):
Like what? A fork? A screwdriver? A boxcutter?

From my book...

As conventional wisdom has it, the 9/11 terrorists exploited a weakness in airport security by smuggling aboard boxcutters. But conventional wisdom is wrong. It was not a failure of airport security that allowed those men to hatch their takeover scheme. It was, instead, a failure of national security – a breakdown of communication and oversight at the FBI and CIA levels. What the men actually exploited was a weakness in our mindset -- a set of presumptions based on the decades-long track record of hijackings and how they were expected to unfold. In years past, a hijacking meant a diversion to Beirut or Havana, with hostage negotiations and standoffs; crews were accordingly trained in the concept of “passive resistance.” The presence of boxcutters was merely incidental. They could have used anything -- onboard silverware, knives fashioned from plastic, a broken bottle wrapped in tape -- particularly when coupled with the bluff of having a bomb. The weapon that mattered was the intangible one: the element of surprise.

Everything is different now, but much of TSA's mindset is still pre-9/11.

TSA has taken silverware from me, more than once, while I was on duty. They will actually stop the line to take a fork or butter knife away from a uniformed airline pilot, even as these same items are dispensed on board planes. How insane is that?

Forget sharp objects. The focus ought to be almost entirely on bombs and explosives. Little else matters.


PS

Well silverware like forks and cutlery can be weapons that can kill a person. How is the TSA going to know whether you are going to attack someone or not? That is why I'll accept whatever the TSA says if I bring forks or any of the stuff you mentioned. If you bring cutlery into security then the TSA officer won't know your intentions with the knives are. They'll assume that you will hurt someone with the knives you have. That is why they confiscate anything that looks like a weapon.



I hope you stand by your promises Obama. I will be really mad if you don't
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5601 posts, RR: 6
Reply 63, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4644 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 62):
How is the TSA going to know whether you are going to attack someone or not?

That's not their job. Their job should be to look for weapons, explosives, and incendiary devices (commonly referred to as WEI). The fact that upwards of 60% of knives get through anyways, and yet there have been zero stabbings, should tell you something.

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 62):
That is why I'll accept whatever the TSA says

That's a great idea: blindly trust an agency that has proven time and time again they have no idea how to actually conduct security and whose leaders are in the pockets of the companies that sell screening materials to them.

Do you accept that your one 4 ounce shampoo bottle is probably filled with liquid explosives, while assuming that your six 3.4 ounce containers of body wash and conditioner is harmless? Because that's EXACTLY what they do.

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 62):
They'll assume that you will hurt someone with the knives you have.

It's irrelevant what they "assume", and assuming things is the worst possible course of action when dealing with security.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineYankeesFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4637 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 63):
That's not their job. Their job should be to look for weapons, explosives, and incendiary devices (commonly referred to as WEI). The fact that upwards of 60% of knives get through anyways, and yet there have been zero stabbings, should tell you something.

Anything that has a sharp edge CAN look like a weapon! Well, it CAN HAPPEN. Someone can hide in a toilet stall with a knife or fork and stab someone!

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 63):
That's a great idea: blindly trust an agency that has proven time and time again they have no idea how to actually conduct security and whose leaders are in the pockets of the companies that sell screening materials to them.
Do you accept that your one 4 ounce shampoo bottle is probably filled with liquid explosives, while assuming that your six 3.4 ounce containers of body wash and conditioner is harmless? Because that's EXACTLY what they do.

People should put those bottles in their checked baggage so TSA officers won't have that problem!

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 63):
It's irrelevant what they "assume", and assuming things is the worst possible course of action when dealing with security.

Well TSA officers take people carrying anything that can be a weapon seriously. People can use the wing of a model airplane as a dagger if it is sharp enough.

[Edited 2012-10-13 01:23:26]


I hope you stand by your promises Obama. I will be really mad if you don't
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2389 posts, RR: 13
Reply 65, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4472 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 64):
People can use the wing of a model airplane as a dagger if it is sharp enough.

  

Thank God for Airbus that is building these A380 with wingtip fences!


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4455 posts, RR: 7
Reply 66, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4303 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 54):
I think the problem with TSA is that they haven't decided to do anything that provides the maximum amount security for the smallest amount of money.

Which makes total sense - but there is absolutely no incentive for the Federal government to actually do that when the Federal Reserve will just keep creating money out of thin air and purchasing new Federal government debt.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 59):

Are you suggesting that's something to be proud of?

50% success rate (if it is that, remember, we're going by your earlier assertion). No, but I wasn't commenting on whether it was good or not, rather your implication that TSA was basically not finding anything.

Quoting skywaymanaz (Reply 61):

Don't get me started on Customs and Immigration. I'm Mexican-American myself, maybe that's what is wrong with my approach or another reason I get mean looks with my US Passport. I have no problem with a policy requiring legal entry into the country. The problem is it is harder to legally enter if you are a Mexican citizen then from almost any other country. A friend of mine married a Mexican national, her mother is a widow and the US won't issue her a visa to visit and refuses to say way. They even got a Senator to pressure for a visa and it is still refused. I'm sure it's not to hard to guess why they're refusing it. She's an elderly widow and they figure if we let her in she'll never leave. Customs and Immigration will never say that, but they're happy to keep taking her money every time she applies, deny the visa and keep her cash. That's the problem and that's where the real racism is in the process, not the legal border enforcement. I'm sure your friend is dealing with the same burden. They'll keep taking his money, saying no and laughing behind his back.

I'm really sorry to hear that. The way the law was written, the visa officer at the embassy is accountable to NOBODY. Not a Senator, not Secretary of State Clinton, not even President Obama. The law clearly states that once a visa officer has an applicant's case, the visa officer is the ONLY person that can decide what happens (denied, approved or put into pergatory of Administrative Processing for years and year and years).

In many of these cases, I suspect that the applicant has a clean background and wouldn't pose any risk to national security, nor any risk of overstaying their visa (especially those who have had visas in the past and always left the USA according to the terms of the visa), but for some reason, the visa officer just "doesn't like the applicant" and so they give them the old Administrative Processing treatment just to torment the applicant. Sounds dramatic, I know, but anyone who thinks otherwise just use google and you'll find thousands and thousands of stories from applicants describing just this kind of treatment.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5601 posts, RR: 6
Reply 67, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4303 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 64):
Anything that has a sharp edge CAN look like a weapon! Well, it CAN HAPPEN. Someone can hide in a toilet stall with a knife or fork and stab someone!

Why are you so afraid?



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineYankeesFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4279 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 67):
Why are you so afraid?

Anything can happen. That is all.



I hope you stand by your promises Obama. I will be really mad if you don't
User currently offlineAntoniemey From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1555 posts, RR: 4
Reply 69, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4116 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 68):
Anything can happen. That is all.

Possibility does not imply probability. Just because I CAN stab someone with a butter knife does not mean I am likely to. And with a locked, reinforced cockpit door, having a butter knife on a plane is not a real, tangible threat. In the terminal it's something of a threat, but at about the same level of me being at a restaurant and someone stabbing me with one of the knives provided there. (Less, actually... most restaurants provide steak knives.)

The problem with the TSA is not really its existence or even most of its people. The problem is its focus. They spend all their time trying to prevent a recurrence of attacks that have already either succeeded or failed. The thing is, a terrorist trying to cause the most damage is going to abandon tactics that have already been majorly noticed, whether they succeeded or not. You know what I worry about? Not a terrorist taking down another plane, or taking one over and running it into more buildings. I worry about attacks outside security, targeted at people queued up in long lines that have been unnecessarily extended by the confiscation of forks and quibbling over half an ounce of shampoo.

But still, the probability is low enough that they don't strip-search people walking into the terminal... They only do that to those of us who've paid for our ticket and want to be somewhere, preferably yesterday.



Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5601 posts, RR: 6
Reply 70, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3939 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 68):

Anything can happen. That is all.

Not an answer. Again, why are you afraid? Yes, it can happen, but it's millions of times more likely to be killed in a car crash. Do you avoid stepping outside of your house? Even then, you are millions of times more likely to be hurt or killed in a home invasion robbery.

There is no reason to give up the essential liberty of being free from unreasonable searches and seizures to ensure that nobody can stab you with a fork in the restroom.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineYankeesFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 71, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3919 times:

Quoting Antoniemey (Reply 69):
Possibility does not imply probability. Just because I CAN stab someone with a butter knife does not mean I am likely to. And with a locked, reinforced cockpit door, having a butter knife on a plane is not a real, tangible threat. In the terminal it's something of a threat, but at about the same level of me being at a restaurant and someone stabbing me with one of the knives provided there. (Less, actually... most restaurants provide steak knives.)

The problem with the TSA is not really its existence or even most of its people. The problem is its focus. They spend all their time trying to prevent a recurrence of attacks that have already either succeeded or failed. The thing is, a terrorist trying to cause the most damage is going to abandon tactics that have already been majorly noticed, whether they succeeded or not. You know what I worry about? Not a terrorist taking down another plane, or taking one over and running it into more buildings. I worry about attacks outside security, targeted at people queued up in long lines that have been unnecessarily extended by the confiscation of forks and quibbling over half an ounce of shampoo.

But still, the probability is low enough that they don't strip-search people walking into the terminal... They only do that to those of us who've paid for our ticket and want to be somewhere, preferably yesterday.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 70):
Not an answer. Again, why are you afraid? Yes, it can happen, but it's millions of times more likely to be killed in a car crash. Do you avoid stepping outside of your house? Even then, you are millions of times more likely to be hurt or killed in a home invasion robbery.

There is no reason to give up the essential liberty of being free from unreasonable searches and seizures to ensure that nobody can stab you with a fork in the restroom.

The fact that it can happen convinces me. Freak accidents will happen but IDK when since they are freak. The TSA just wants NO chance of a stabbing to happen! I am NOT afraid of stepping out of my house but I realize that anything can happen. If my team is good I am nervous every game because they can have a bad game.

[Edited 2012-10-13 23:29:06]


I hope you stand by your promises Obama. I will be really mad if you don't
User currently offlinerobsaw From Canada, joined Dec 2008, 236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 72, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3918 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 70):
There is no reason to give up the essential liberty of being free from unreasonable searches and seizures to ensure that nobody can stab you with a fork in the restroom.

Thanks for affirming that at least some Americans still believe in the concept of liberty enshrined in their constitution.

As opposed to concepts like:
- it is a necessary evil (if only the truly necessary and reasonable things were done it wouldn't be "evil")
- it keeps us safe and secure (Ben Franklin "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.")
- It is working (no, the current model is bound to fail and be wasteful because it is akin to drift-net fishing that catches all sorts of untargeted fish while having no assurance of efficiently and accurately capturing the desired species. the sheer volume and lack of skill and intelligence applied to the process makes it highly vulnerable to error and breaches. )


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4218 posts, RR: 1
Reply 73, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3727 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 63):
That's a great idea: blindly trust an agency that has proven time and time again they have no idea how to actually conduct security and whose leaders are in the pockets of the companies that sell screening materials to them.

Do you accept that your one 4 ounce shampoo bottle is probably filled with liquid explosives, while assuming that your six 3.4 ounce containers of body wash and conditioner is harmless? Because that's EXACTLY what they do.

I keep my toiletries in my checked baggage, why would you need to have shampoo with you anyway? Are you planning to have a shower or wash you hair in the loo? Those rooms are so small, you have to step out side to change your mind let alone have a shower.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 74, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3666 times:

Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 18):
It was not al Queda that utterly ruined my one true love, it was someone else entirely.
Quoting md80fanatic (Reply 18):

Travelers were treated with the utmost respect and reverence, as they should be (being the sole "customer" of passenger airlines) not despicable suspicious wonks one eye blink away from lighting their underwear or shoes on fire.
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 21):
I personally believe all the security theater is diverting tourism from the USA.

We always have TSA threads, unfortunately after so many one would hope to have a lively discussion of alternatives, as long as we have complaints the regulators will always be able to present justification. Regardless of what the population thought was improper, we have elected and professional officials standing in congress showing facts and figures to justify actions being taken, I do not believe that complaints alone will accomplish anything, at least not in the near distant future.

So, how do we deal with individuals who are willing to take advantage of our free society to kill, maime and create havoc?
The USA is a liability country, so as one poster above asked - Why are you afraid - if we do away with pat downs, xray machines and other TSA items which we consider infringments of our rights and someone gets hurt and or killed, who takes responsibility, or do we just say tough luck it was your time?

As mentioned above, the customers who board a/c on a daily basis for travel from point A to point B is not the issue / problem, the problem is those few individuals who choose to take advantage of the process that is in place for those individuals comfort. Mob / ganster figures who could not be convicted on criminal charges were ultimately caught and put in jail on tax evasion charges, unfortunately for airlines, no one seems to be able to guarantee that one will get a second chance if the first attempt is botched.


User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2389 posts, RR: 13
Reply 75, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3644 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 71):
The TSA just wants NO chance of a stabbing to happen!

That is a laudable goal, yes. But a ludicrous one if you ask about the feasibility.

From my studies I remember a graph showing the cost-effectiveness of various AIDS / HIV prevention schemes. First, you have some kind of basic education on the disease and how it will be spread. Takes several social workers to visit villages, have talks with the inhabitants, explain them what the disease is and how it is spread. It is quite cheap given the wages in countries like Tanzania, but not really effective either.

As one of the next steps you could offer blood testing every time somebody visits a doctor. It is much more effective, since it appeals to the people who care about their health already. But this is costing a lot more, especially if in rural areas the infrastructure isn't there. As far as I know there is no really low-tech way to detect HIV or HIV antibodies.

So you have to set priorities. In almost everything you do, you settle for the stuff that isn't too expensive, but gives you the most reward. Why learning to fly on a PC-12 if a 172 would do? Every part of my mountaineering gear was the cheapest offer because I am still a beginner and simply don't have the need for specialized stuff.


Imagine 20% of TSA's budget being spent on drug abuse prevention and rehab. We could save people by the thousands.


David

[Edited 2012-10-14 06:37:31]


Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 76, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3620 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 75):
From my studies I remember a graph showing the cost-effectiveness of various AIDS / HIV prevention schemes.

How about not testing blood for HIV before it is placed in the blood bank?
Arthur Ashe contracted the virus because of such a situation, which is now standard fare, the comparions to aviation is we either screen pax or harden the targets to prevent any damage if one malcontent gets onboard, big question, can we really harden and a/c?

Reviewing the data after flights is one thing, the issue is what happens iof one does get through and something happens.


User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1317 posts, RR: 52
Reply 77, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3611 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Quoting Frostbite (Reply 20):
Come on, the security experience sucked long before the 9/11-era.

I disagree. I remember enjoying going to the airport and not being worried that if I was not there 2 hrs in advance, I might miss my flight. Just last week - my wife was in security at DEN for 1.5 hours.
Also, remember - 9/11 was not an airport security failure. It was a national security failure.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 22):
I agree with you, I fly all the time and find that there is rarely an issue at the airports I use. I have never personally encountered any issues with the TSA.

Good for you. Others have. Mostly TSA is just wasteful of time, money and freedom without accomplishing much. The national and personal resources wasted by TSA and the drama is astounding. Remember - national resources = personal resources, since all federal money is wrenched from your pocket - the government creates NOTHING. Nor is it supposed to.

Quoting aviateur (Reply 38):
It's not about "having a problem" with a specific employee. It's about the whole approach that TSA takes to passenger security. TSA guards can be the nicest people in the world; that doesn't excuse their protocols, or the fact that, for the most part, they are wasting our time and tax money.

  

Quoting brilondon (Reply 48):
Why would you question their motives when all you have to do is act civil and show what you had in your bag.

In the America I grew up in, you do not need to justify yourself for standing around. You are also not required to subject yourself to random unmotivated searches. Unfortunately, the moment you walk into the security area in an airport, you are implicitly surrendering those rights. The argument is, if you don't want to surrender those rights, then don't fly. However, in a modern society, that is not reasonable. Hence you are coerced into surrendering your rights.
The TSA agent, or policeman, has no right to search your property because of your 'presence' - or shouldn't.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 48):
I have traveled all over the world and you think that the TSA is bad? Try taking pictures at CAN or PEK. You think that they would just pull at your shoulder strap? Heck, try TLV, see what they do.

I've been to all three. They were strict, but not 'bad'. In fact, they were far more professional and less comic in my opinion. I was surprised by that. Even Moscow - in the day - was better - tho strange. The difference was the security was 'real'. Also - none of those places are the US with the US constitution governing (supposedly) the treatment of people. I don't expect to be treated the same in Moscow. I expect the driver to be pulled over by a policeman and have to go into an alley and bribe his way out. I don't expect that in the US.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 51):
That would indicate that they DO stop harmful things from getting on the airplanes up to 50% of the time.

50% success rate is abysmal. BTW - I suspect 100% of those cases were totally innocent.

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 64):
People should put those bottles in their checked baggage so TSA officers won't have that problem!

And pay for the bag when you don't need to? Why should I do that?

Quoting robsaw (Reply 72):
uoting Maverick623 (Reply 70):
There is no reason to give up the essential liberty of being free from unreasonable searches and seizures to ensure that nobody can stab you with a fork in the restroom.
Thank you.

Thanks for affirming that at least some Americans still believe in the concept of liberty enshrined in their constitution.

There are more than you think.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 73):
I keep my toiletries in my checked baggage, why would you need to have shampoo with you anyway?

Again - I travel light. I do not check bags, typically, until I exceed 7 days on the road. Why should I pay for TSA's treatment of my shampoo?



rcair1
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2389 posts, RR: 13
Reply 78, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3569 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 74):
The USA is a liability country, so as one poster above asked - Why are you afraid - if we do away with pat downs, xray machines and other TSA items which we consider infringments of our rights and someone gets hurt and or killed, who takes responsibility, or do we just say tough luck it was your time?

We have to live with bad luck. On average, Americans do not live longer than Europeans - and we have a much lower rate of medical malpractice suits.

Yes, who takes responsibility? I not only trust on my doctor do good judgements, but I also question him about the diagnosis and the treatment options. Caring of my heath is also my job.

It seems to me that the average American is hating the government, trying to save taxes but at the same time, they're quick to criticize the government if the next 767 is blown up high in the air. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

I would only criticize somebody if he acted negligent by not living up to his or her professional training. Looking at how professional TSA employees are... well. I don't expect them to increase safety anyway.

Quoting par13del (Reply 74):
the problem is those few individuals who choose to take advantage of the process that is in place for those individuals comfort.

That's often the case.

100 % sensitivity is catching all terrorists, killers, criminals and nutcases.

100 % specificity is not harassing all those who do no harm.

You never achieve both by principle. Therefore, two-stage tests are used - one that detects all the harmful people (together with quite a number of harmless individuals), and one that detects all the harmless people that were flagged by the first test. You can do that vice versa too.

Now, what happens if you if you screen 40'000 passengers, and 10 of them are psychologically unstable people (danger to other people about 10%) and one terrorist (danger to other people 95%)?

The first test screening for harmful people will detect about 100 people which might do harm, but then an interview with the TSA bloke - the second test - will clear 90 of them. Many of them will miss their flight.

It would be great to use a third test at the beginning. It won't be perfect (as any other test is), but you could screen only passengers for flight that are liable to get attacked. Spring-breaking students flying to Florida or Cancun? Who would want to bomb such a flight? Or a tourist-packed flight to Hawaii? Or why attack an ATR-72 regional flight? It makes much more impact if you let a A380 explode over the middle of the Atlantic.

That way, you narrow down the 40'000 passengers down to 15'000, thus making the other two screenings much, much more effective.

Of course you can screen the other 25'000 passengers randomly from time to time.

If you force your doctor to do every cancer diagnostic if you feel very sick, wouldn't that clog the hospitals too?


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2389 posts, RR: 13
Reply 79, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3536 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 76):
How about not testing blood for HIV before it is placed in the blood bank?

I wrote about the situation in a country like Tanzania, where blood donations aren't exactly a common event, and most transmission happens sexually. Testing blood donations for HIV is extremely efficient and effective, as you pool samples from each donation and then you run a PCR test. That's not the problem.

(But 2-5 days post-infection, a blood donor's HIV infection will not get detected anyway. That's the reason for questionnaires.)

Quoting par13del (Reply 76):
Arthur Ashe contracted the virus because of such a situation, which is now standard fare, the comparions to aviation is we either screen pax or harden the targets to prevent any damage if one malcontent gets onboard, big question, can we really harden and a/c?
Eurosurveillance reports 37 HIV-infected blood donors per 100'000 blood donors in Eastern Europe. Given that blood donations will be splitted often (erythrocyte concentrate, blood plasma, platelets, leukocytes...) the potential for a few hundred infected people is there.

But still: If you need a blood transfusion, chances are high that you would be dead without the transfusion. The risk-benefit ratio is in favor of getting a blood transfusion even without HIV screening. In Eastern Europe.

My answer to your question is that we do the screening in a much more efficient way, and the rest is just... bad luck. The people who have ever died due to aviation-related terrorist attacks are still outnumbered by CFIT accidents.

Quoting par13del (Reply 76):
Reviewing the data after flights is one thing, the issue is what happens iof one does get through and something happens.

Bad luck. Aviation is enough safe, even if we starve TSA half of its annual 8.1 billion budget.


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5601 posts, RR: 6
Reply 80, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3384 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 71):
The TSA just wants NO chance of a stabbing to happen!

Considering that is a statistical impossibility...

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 71):
If my team is good I am nervous every game because they can have a bad game.

You're comparing the goal of eliminating all possible weapons that could cause all the worst things to go wrong.... to a sports game?

You are not "nervous". You are a kid who has bought into the post-9/11 hysteria about security and safety, and that's at best.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 73):

I keep my toiletries in my checked baggage, why would you need to have shampoo with you anyway? Are you planning to have a shower or wash you hair in the loo? Those rooms are so small, you have to step out side to change your mind let alone have a shower.

1) Not everyone likes to check a bag.

2) It is not yours, nor the government's, not even an airline's, place to tell me when and where I can take my freakin shampoo. That is the most asinine thing I have ever heard, and truly speaks to how insane this whole thing is.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineAntoniemey From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1555 posts, RR: 4
Reply 81, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3371 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 73):
I keep my toiletries in my checked baggage, why would you need to have shampoo with you anyway? Are you planning to have a shower or wash you hair in the loo? Those rooms are so small, you have to step out side to change your mind let alone have a shower.

1: Never put anything you are going to need within 24 hours of arrival in a checked bag, because bags can and DO get lost.

2: If I'm traveling for any period less than a week, I pack 1 carry-on and my laptop bag. In a stretch (if I'm going somewhere I know there will be easy access to laundry or I won't have to wear anything beyond very casual clothes) I can make 2 weeks on that arrangement. Therefore, my toiletries go in the carry-on bag.



Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
User currently offlineYankeesFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3176 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 80):
You're comparing the goal of eliminating all possible weapons that could cause all the worst things to go wrong.... to a sports game?

You are not "nervous". You are a kid who has bought into the post-9/11 hysteria about security and safety, and that's at best.

You really have to go that far as to call me a kid? The TSA just wants nothing bad to happen after security. I didn't really have any bad experiences with the TSA because I mainly followed their rules. One time I got my sunscreen bottle confiscated by the TSA because I put it in my carry on. It was MY fault not the TSA's. I still regret it to this day. If I brought a knife in my carry on and it got confiscated it would be my fault even if I forgot to take it out. The TSA will mess up a few times. The TSA is decent but not great. That incident however was HORRIBLE!



I hope you stand by your promises Obama. I will be really mad if you don't
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5601 posts, RR: 6
Reply 83, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3150 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 82):
You really have to go that far as to call me a kid?

You're statements are extremely naive. One day you will understand exactly what is happening, and that this isn't some flippin sports game.

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 82):
That incident however was HORRIBLE!

What incident? And what does a tube of sunscreen have anything to do with, well, anything??



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineYankeesFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 84, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3145 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 83):
What incident? And what does a tube of sunscreen have anything to do with, well, anything??

I was talking about one of my experiences with the TSA. And I was talking about the incident that was mentioned in the thread starter.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 83):
You're statements are extremely naive. One day you will understand exactly what is happening, and that this isn't some flippin sports game.

You're right, this isn't a sports game. That is how I like to compare things. And what information in my comment was naive?



I hope you stand by your promises Obama. I will be really mad if you don't
User currently offlineaviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1352 posts, RR: 11
Reply 85, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2664 times:

Quoting YankeesFan (Reply 62):
Well silverware like forks and cutlery can be weapons that can kill a person. How is the TSA going to know whether you are going to attack someone or not? That is why I'll accept whatever the TSA says if I bring forks or any of the stuff you mentioned. If you bring cutlery into security then the TSA officer won't know your intentions with the knives are. They'll assume that you will hurt someone with the knives you have. That is why they confiscate anything that looks like a weapon.

Well, except that they GIVE OUT forks and knives on the plane! The same forks and knives they confiscated from me, while on duty. That's about as much of a waste of time, money and resources as can possibly be imagined. Not to mention it's simply demented, and does NOTHING to improve safety or security.

Cutlery "can be weapons that can kill a person." Right, and so can a ballpoint pen, or any number of things you could fashion from furnishings that are already on an airplane, such as a broken dinner plate, a wine bottle, etc.

Like I was saying in my thread above, unless you're talking about guns or explosives, this isn't about WEAPONS.

PS



Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7477 posts, RR: 18
Reply 86, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2624 times:

Quoting aviateur (Reply 85):
Cutlery "can be weapons that can kill a person." Right, and so can a ballpoint pen, or any number of things you could fashion from furnishings that are already on an airplane, such as a broken dinner plate, a wine bottle, etc.

   The problem is that pretty much any blunt object can be a weapon. In my self-defense class, I was taught how to use my MacBook as a weapon without destroying it   



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineYankeesFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 87, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2496 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 86):
The problem is that pretty much any blunt object can be a weapon. In my self-defense class, I was taught how to use my MacBook as a weapon without destroying it

Yep. Anything that is sharp can harm a person.



I hope you stand by your promises Obama. I will be really mad if you don't
User currently onlinecopter808 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1085 posts, RR: 1
Reply 88, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2324 times:

Quoting aviateur (Reply 38):
Quoting N62NA (Reply 49):
We have been trying now for 3 years to bring an EU citizen to the USA

Yes, and I'm quite certain that they willingly took your visa application fee before telling you (or the applicant) that the fee was non-refundable and the officer's decision was not subject to appeal. Oh yes, they also would not give you any information about how you could get approval--other than to submit a new application AND THE FEE so they could deny it again!


User currently offlineaviateur From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1352 posts, RR: 11
Reply 89, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2296 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 22):
Granted they don't enhance security but do give the impression that they are "keeping you safe" through the biggest waste of money the government can do on an on going basis.

Are we that infantile a nation that we need phony and wasteful security in order to "feel" safe?

It's depressing.


PS



Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Changed Aer Lingus To An All Airbus Fleet? posted Sat Nov 26 2005 18:11:06 by Shamrock350
YX All Time "low" In A/C Damage posted Mon Jun 6 2005 22:15:58 by SkyexRamper
All Things Come To An End posted Fri Apr 11 2003 03:01:33 by GDB
Airliners.net Content Sinks To New Low posted Fri Nov 16 2001 07:47:37 by JETPILOT
UA To Outsource All Former CO Cargo Stations posted Wed Jul 25 2012 10:25:42 by tsnamm
TSA Agents To Work In British Airports - Olympics posted Tue Jul 17 2012 09:14:39 by planejamie
Will United Be An All Boeing Airline? posted Wed May 9 2012 17:28:04 by SWALUV
Birdstrikes In Engines Seems At All Time High posted Fri Apr 20 2012 08:19:53 by flaps30
Is QF An All A380 Operation @ LAX? posted Thu Apr 5 2012 13:17:09 by 747400sp
Airbus Reports All Time Record Sales For 2011 posted Tue Jan 17 2012 04:41:26 by rheinwaldner