edit [ and ] will stand for quotation marks, my apologies, my keyboard is a bit battered these days.
background on me....ive worked at cvg for six years, two of them were in the terminal, and yes i thought that going through security was a waste of my time and always made me late, in truth it wasnt a waste of time and i was only late by my own fault, not allowing enough time to be where i needed to be!! and it wasnt a waste, always i was calling the airport police about bags being left in the sitting area of starbucks where i worked, i forget the year but a bomb did explode in a suitcase once in LaGuardia airport so hello folks it is for your safety, but then you dont care do you? for two and a half years i worked security at my airport through three different private companies, and for two years i worked security for TSA
. Hi, nice to meet you all, my name is Dave and apparently im an incompetent, thank you dearly for bringing that to my attention for im too incompetent to figure it out for myself! i also worked for one of the airlines at my airport and had to deal with both pax and security so like most of the posts in here i am not spouting about something which i merely have an opinion of, albeit humble. i have working knowledge of airport security from the inside, not the outside like most babblers here. while i no longer work for the TSA
, on my own accord thank you, i still support them and the screeners who take shit all day from pax who act stupid, while they still fight to protect your butts. kind of like the soldiers who get no respect when they come back from fighting our battles for us, elsewhere might i add...not here in the US.
[As a pilot who is well-hearsed on our nation's aviation system, the TSA
is a BIG improvement from pre-9/11 screeners.]
first thank you as a pilot for respecting tsa and saying it aloud, you obviously arent one of the many pilots i met that made me think twice about joining the profession. yes the screeners are a big improvement, as they are trained better and more thoroughly with tougher guidelines.
[1. It provides a universal standard at every single airport in the nation. ]
not from what ive heard, but from what ive experienced yes. my key point here is that many airports have different threat levels. for example at one time, not so sure about now, but any flight leaving from my airport to DCA
, no one was allowed to get up in the last 30 minutes of the flight, and there were announcements made about this even in the gate house.
[to screen baggage and passengers and threat everyone (except the 17-40 year old Arab men) like the terrorist we are.]
you obviously have no idea what you are speaking about, this is highly contrary to the guidance i received from my superiors. again im guessing you never worked for the tsa, how can you possibly know the procedures other than what is presented to you? i.e. handwanding selectee selections, btw simply buying a one way ticket isnt the only criteria that makes you a selectee genuises. and i know that from working at tsa and the airline i worked for.
[BTW, most of the screeners hired by TSA
came from the former screener contractor companies.]
yea me for one. so whats your point? when AA
took over TWA did you show up to the airport saying, some of these people came from TWA ugh! probably not, just becuase the company wasnt good doesnt mean the people werent.
[Look at how many TSA
screeners who are now in jail for theft, or who had to be fired because they had prior felonies.]
look at how many CEOs are being charged with theft of millions from thousands of people. and im sure if you sit one day in a county court many people will be there for theft and have probably never set foot in an airport...theft isnt confined to the tsa nor is it committed by them all. this is how i always thought of it a) no matter what you think, there is nothing in your bag or pockets that i could not buy for myself, b) you dont have anything in your bag or pockets that could be possibly worth losing my job. hate to burst the self enclosing self important bubble.
[We were actually safer right after 9/11 when we were still using contract screeners, backed up by the Army National Guard.]
[Under the TSA
we are actually LESS-SAFE, today when compared to the morning of 9/10/01, according to the GAO.]
agreed to the first sentence. military or law enforcement should be a permanent sentry at every checkpoint. as for the second sentence, i fail to see how that is true as in hindsight we know what was to happened the next day, doesnt anyone think for themselves anymore?
[If someone beeps, no holding up a hundred people to let that person go through again. A respectful but very thorough body search. And none of this absurd taking the shoes off. If you beep, they check under the shoes. That's it.]
right pull them aside the first time wand them and let the line get on. but apparently not everyone feels as comfortable as say you or i with a thorough body search, some have thier very good reasons, some think they just shouldnt because they are them go figure. but why is it so absurd to take off your shoes? most shoes have metal supports in the arches anyway that may or maynot alarm, why take that chance? and im certain that if someone has plastice explosives in thier shoes with out xray or explosive trace detection, you are not going to know it, so what do you do, let everyone pass with shoes on and hope they arent on your flight?
[After 9/11 there will never be a group of passive passengers - so no group that gets up trying to take over a plane will go unchallenged by the rest of the folks sitting in the cabin]
things will get through, it will happen, nobody can ever catch everything. so what you are saying is basically if a man gets up and stands in the aisle with a bomb strapped to his chest your going to rush him right? or if he holds up a gun or grenade you will open the overhead bin and let your overstuffed bag fall out and knock him cold eh? granted if he has a box cutter id charge him, i think we all would in that case or similiar. and we can talk to no end about what we would do but until we find ourselves in that moment we really have no idea.
is a joke. It screens passengers, but mail and cargo enter the commercial system with ease and no screening at all.]
and how does that make the TSA
a joke, becuase the congressman you elected voted against giving them money and equipment and oversight to do this with?
[Our problem is not with today's airline passenger. It is with our failure to gather and understand intelligence and control our Southern and Northern Borders.]
outstanding point, but they are all jointed together really.
[ So....why need 39 people for two open lines? Isnt that a waste of federal tax dollars? ]
do you know what exactly those 39 folks were doing? perhaps training for other airports? some might have been shift changing, trust me i know how overstaffing was, but as being one who was at one time included in the RIF (reduction in force) due to budget cuts, they have pared back screeners to a minimum in some airports even mine, where it might seem like there are alot of screeners on the push times but they are sometimes pulled from other terminals too and even checked baggage areas. funny you didnt bother to ask why there were so many if it concerned you so. and probably so a waste of imagination.
order mandating airlines use stronger doors would most likely prevented the hijackings, or made them much more difficult as to force the terrorists to scrap the mission.]
in my opinion, opinion only, the FAA and airlines could at times be kissing cousins. yea the doors would have worked and do now, but the cost of what the airlines had to go through to do that is what prevented them from doing it before, also they have heavy lobbying power when it comes to spending money they dont want too.
[i had a lady here in IAH
deny me access with my company ID
......only until her supervisor came over and told her that i was to be allowed through, did she show any sort of common sense]
talk about lack of common sense, apparently all anyone has to do is obtain a company ID
to get by you. she didnt think you were allowed access and rightfully denied it to you, should she let you go through if she doesnt think you should? no, thats why the supervisor became involved and cleared you hello! think McFly!
[however once they see my badge they shut their mouth...what kind of consistency is that? i cant wait to get rid of them!!! good riddance.]
why isnt your badge in place where it can be seen like it should be, above the waist on the outer most garment? how do you expect someone to see your ID
all the time, often coats or ties cover them up anyways
Apodino...reply 16....well said.
[why are they better? b/c of a federal title? many of these are the same employees that were there before 9/11]
because of better more intense training, standards, requirements, attitudes, and believe it or not, alot of these people just like thier damn job ok.
[If they make exceptions for airline employees, that undermines the whole purpose and could lead to a problem]
i think that gentleman was referring to not having to go through secondary screening for not removing his shoes because he had an airline ID
. that was standard procedure when i was there, not necessarily correct procedure but was what we were told to follow.
[(yeah, we could have the private screeners search 80 year old women and 5 year old boys too).]
this kind of rubbish talk is particularly annoying. think of this, do you think that a 5yo little boy is going to tell you that mommy or daddy put a gun in his pants so becuase he wouldnt be suspected? or that someone traveling with thier grandma who suffers from alzheimers going to suddenly become surprisingly coherent and tell you they had explosives strapped to them against thier will? put some deep thought into it, not snide remarks. i read a story in the paper a couple years ago where a baby was found travelling with its grandparent in MIA
, in customs the baby was found to be a drug mule FOR
the grandparents, stuffed with drugs. yea there ARE some sick people out there that will stop at nothing and do whats least expected. besides that how do i know this person is really 80yo? ever watch the golden girls? sophia or estelle getty in real life, supposed to be in her 80s on the show was the youngest of the four actresses, she was really only in her 60s at the time, and for a really good look at what im talking about read this book, The Lottery, by David Balducci.
thank yall for listening to me, none of my statements however sarcastic or intoned are meant to be personally directed hostility. simply statements from one longtime former screener who is tired of hearing all the BS
from one side, who can finally say something in defense without fear of dismissal. peace be with us all and safety too.
They don't call em' emergencies anymore. They call em' Patronies.