My TSA Diatribe

[sjfcontrol]

Yep, absolutely agree...When and if someone in our government realizes that they (Israelis) have discovered the tried and true, and most cost effective, security system around the world, we will unfortunately be at the mercy of those idiots...I will not fault the TSA for this implemented system, they are only doing what they are told to do, they probably don't like it anymore than we do, but they are also doing a job...And making a living doing it...At least they are employed, and not sucking off the government for sustenance (for the most part)...

Assuming here you're referring to the screeners themselves, not the TSA Management...
Umm, it's a government job. One of questionable usefulness. How exactly is that different from "sucking off the government for sustenance"?
On further thought, I'm not sure that the previous statement doesn't apply to TSA Management, too.

[Excaliber]

Stevie_D_64:

Stevie:

I like your ideas on:

- zip tying the gun (I usually field strip, but this is still a great idea - especially with a high visibility color of zip tie)
- using a plastic reloader's box (when I use this method I put a rubber band around it to make sure it doesn't lose its top)
- keeping the last flight's tag inside your gun case to silently clue in the ticket agent that you know what you're doing and have been approved before. I'm going to adopt this one.

It's also a good idea to keep a copy of the rules for flying with firearms and ammo from the web site of the company you're flying with to save some time if a ticket agent unfamiliar with the details starts to go off on a tangent (it happens.)

Many airlines do limit the amount of ammo you can carry, but it's in the hundreds of rounds. I don't get concerned about the limit because I usually travel with just a personal defense quantity of a box or two and pick up anything else I might need locally at my destination.

[VMI77]

I am not much for conspiracy theories and I don’t put a lot of stock in claims that the TSA or the government is intentionally attempting anything nefarious. When Secretary Napolitano and TSA Chief Pistole tell us that these measures are intended to keep us safe – I have no reason to doubt these claims. Some argue that the new measures are ineffective at accomplishing this goal. Perhaps, but even that assertion is not the primary concern.

I think you're giving the government way too much credit. I think the ruling class is largely criminal and sociopathic and sees the majority of us mostly as resources to be exploited and plundered (and to be clear, here I am speaking of people like Napolitano and her ilk, the people at the top making the decisions, not the larger class of government employees just trying to earn a living). I don't think they care a wit about keeping "us" safe. What they care about is keeping themselves and their interests safe --and preserving their power. They may tolerate or allow our interests to be served as long was we don't get in the way of serving theirs.

To think of it in terms like "nefarious" is perhaps misleading. Was the TARP nefarious? Or was it a class of people with power taking care of their own interests first? These people you think are concerned with our safety orchestrated the largest theft in history and did it against the will of the overwhelming majority of Americans. Is that a conspiracy? If so, it wasn't a hidden conspiracy since they did it right out in the open with absolute contempt for anything but their own interests. You and your children, and probably our grandchildren, are going to pay for this thievery for the rest of our lives.

I don't think the scanners have that much to do with safety or security. As others have pointed out, the Israelis face real threats and are the world's experts in dealing with terrorism, and they don't use them. What the scanners are about is money. People at the top have a financial interest in selling scanners and the power to get them bought with your tax dollars. Someone created a device and needed a market to sell it. They used and bought government connections, like Chertoff, to make it happen. It's just a big league version of a county commissioner's brother-in-law getting a paving contract.

But yes, I also agree with the point I think you were making: that whether or not it is intentional, these kinds of security measures are conditioning the population to be obedient to government power and are paving the way to a police state.

And I think Bald Eagle makes a great point. This is supposed to a capitalist free market country. Where's the free market here? Why is the government even involved in this at all? In a free market, the airlines would be responsible for their own security. Not only would the cost of security then be more appropriately distributed, competing market elements would drive greater innovation, and we'd all end up more secure.

[terryg]

I am not much for conspiracy theories and I don’t put a lot of stock in claims that the TSA or the government is intentionally attempting anything nefarious. When Secretary Napolitano and TSA Chief Pistole tell us that these measures are intended to keep us safe – I have no reason to doubt these claims. Some argue that the new measures are ineffective at accomplishing this goal. Perhaps, but even that assertion is not the primary concern.

I think you're giving the government way too much credit. I think the ruling class is largely criminal and sociopathic sees the majority of us mostly as resources to be exploited and plundered (and to be clear, here I am speaking of people like Napolitano and her ilk, the people at the top making the decisions, not the larger class of government employees just trying to earn a living). I don't think they care a wit about keeping "us" safe. What they care about is keeping themselves and their interests safe --and preserving their power. They may tolerate or allow our interests to be served as long was we don't get in the way of serving theirs.

There is a part of me that is tempted to believe that this may be true. But I just don't go that far. I think the system befuddles the intentions.

But, as was the point of my ranting, it really doesn't matter.

[terryg]

Here is my new shortened version (mini-diatribe):

------
I would rather live (and fly) at an increased risk of dying in a terrorist attack against a free America than to live in the ‘safety’ offered by the police state that America (Amerika?) will become.

Some argue that the new measures are not effective. IT DOES NOT MATTER!

Secretary Napolitano and TSA Chief Pistole assure us that they are only interested in our safety. IT DOES NOT MATTER!

Some have expressed health concerns. IT DOES NOT MATTER!

If we accept this as the price of safety while in the air, why will we not accept it as the price of safety anywhere people gather in mass – stadiums, malls, office buildings, schools, etc. Will the police state be welcomed in with applause because we feel a little bit safer while sitting in our airplane seats?

I heard a news commentator state that our servicemen and women are fighting with their very lives to keep us safe and yet we cannot tolerate a little inconvenience in an effort to do the same. But these brave men and women are risking their lives to protect ALL of our freedoms. I think a far worse tragedy would be for our fighting men and women to return home to a country resembling a high tech version of the evil they have been combating.
------

This one should be short enough to send to newspapers.

[VMI77]

I am not much for conspiracy theories and I don’t put a lot of stock in claims that the TSA or the government is intentionally attempting anything nefarious. When Secretary Napolitano and TSA Chief Pistole tell us that these measures are intended to keep us safe – I have no reason to doubt these claims. Some argue that the new measures are ineffective at accomplishing this goal. Perhaps, but even that assertion is not the primary concern.

I think you're giving the government way too much credit. I think the ruling class is largely criminal and sociopathic sees the majority of us mostly as resources to be exploited and plundered (and to be clear, here I am speaking of people like Napolitano and her ilk, the people at the top making the decisions, not the larger class of government employees just trying to earn a living). I don't think they care a wit about keeping "us" safe. What they care about is keeping themselves and their interests safe --and preserving their power. They may tolerate or allow our interests to be served as long was we don't get in the way of serving theirs.

There is a part of me that is tempted to believe that this may be true. But I just don't go that far. I think the system befuddles the intentions.

But, as was the point of my ranting, it really doesn't matter.

We're just not so far down the road yet. However, history shows a pretty clear picture of what motivates people to gain power over others, and how they perceive themselves and their use of power, and it doesn't vary by race or region, it's a human universal. The dictum that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, is true. This country today is not the country I was born into. The government has more power, meaning the people at the top have more power, and as certain as gravity causes objects to fall to earth, our government gaining more power means it is also becoming more corrupt. The only question is how corrupt we have become? I believe we're already at the point that the people at the top have too much power and can't be trusted with the power they have. As you say, the system befuddles the intentions, that's why we can still have this discussion, but this befuddlement will eventually be overcome.

I fear the process is accelerating. I have only my own experience and indirect observation to generalize from, so I may be wrong, but my own experience is not heartening. Contempt for the truth is at an all time high. Going back to the scanner example again....as I understand it, the x-ray scanners have been marketed as safe based on whole body radiation absorption. However, the people who make these machines, and the TSA, know this measure is a falsehood because the radiation is all absorbed by the skin and doesn't penetrate the whole body. That makes the effective radiation dose much higher than they are claiming. In other words, they chose a way of presenting information about the operation of these machines that is misleading, at best, and probably a deliberate lie. And they don't appear to be particularly interested in determining if these devices, when evaluated correctly, are truly safe.

[VMI77]

Here is my new shortened version (mini-diatribe):

------
I would rather live (and fly) at an increased risk of dying in a terrorist attack against a free America than to live in the ‘safety’ offered by the police state that America (Amerika?) will become.

Some argue that the new measures are not effective. IT DOES NOT MATTER!

Secretary Napolitano and TSA Chief Pistole assure us that they are only interested in our safety. IT DOES NOT MATTER!

Some have expressed health concerns. IT DOES NOT MATTER!

If we accept this as the price of safety while in the air, why will we not accept it as the price of safety anywhere people gather in mass – stadiums, malls, office buildings, schools, etc. Will the police state be welcomed in with applause because we feel a little bit safer while sitting in our airplane seats?

I heard a news commentator state that our servicemen and women are fighting with their very lives to keep us safe and yet we cannot tolerate a little inconvenience in an effort to do the same. But these brave men and women are risking their lives to protect ALL of our freedoms. I think a far worse tragedy would be for our fighting men and women to return home to a country resembling a high tech version of the evil they have been combating.
------

This one should be short enough to send to newspapers.

I don't fly anymore. And given what is required these days I will not fly unless some circumstance absolutely requires me to do it, so I haven't paid all that much attention to the scanner debate. But to me, the scanners aren't the problem, they're just a symptom of the real problem. The real problem is that we're creating a nation of obedient serfs who are willing to "follow orders" without question. Can you imagine an American man of 100 years ago allowing a government employee, female or not, to grope his wife in the name of security? Today, it's not only widely tolerated, people are making excuses for it. I'm not at all nostalgic about the past. I think many things have gotten better than they were in the past and many good things continue to happen, but I also think our society has lost something intangible, part of it's soul, if you will, and that loss is going to destroy us.

[woodsong]

El Al has a very good safety record, and they do not use backscatter x-ray, and they rarely use invasive pat-downs.

Their secret? They unapologetically profile. But it isn't just the crude profiling we think of today. It is rather that they have very well trained profilers who scan the passengers in the lines, looking for anything that sets off their spidey sense. When a passenger draws their attention, that passenger is subjected to an intensive interview. At least that is how I understand it.

Quite true. I came back from Israel a few days ago ... their security procedures are much less invasive and arbitrary than ours are. I probably passed through Israeli security faster than I passed through US security. You don't realize it, but you are observed and profiled at least a dozen times during the process (beginning when you get out of your car or taxi and approach the terminal entry doors). It's not politically correct -- but it works and is efficient.

All in all, I felt much safer and less inconvenienced after passing through Israeli security than I did after passing through US security.

[baldeagle]

I heard a news commentator state that our servicemen and women are fighting with their very lives to keep us safe and yet we cannot tolerate a little inconvenience in an effort to do the same. But these brave men and women are risking their lives to protect ALL of our freedoms. I think a far worse tragedy would be for our fighting men and women to return home to a country resembling a high tech version of the evil they have been combating.

It's already happening. I got email from a friend reporting on a return flight of our troops from Afghanistan. There were 330 military men and women on the flight, each carrying an M-16, some also carrying M-9 handguns and a few carrying M-240 machineguns. Their ammo had been confiscated and boxed up before they took off from Bagram Airport, and they had all been searched and screened by both the US Customs department and the military flight screeners.

They landed in Indiana to offload 100 members of the Indiana National Guard on their way to their final destination. TSA made all 330 men and women deplane and placed them in a holding area for two hours with no food or water, only a single latrine, while they debated what to do with them. They decided that it wasn't necessary to search their luggage but every service member would have to go through security. They confiscated nail clippers and pocket knives from every member they found them on before they would allow them through security.

So much for fighting for freedom.

[C-dub]

For those touting the Israeli method, I think they require people to be at the airport 3+ hours prior to their flights. This may be required in order to be able to do the type of profiling they perform. Given the volume of people travelling in this country and at some of our larger airports, how many do you think will be willing to be at the airport this far in advance?

[cbr600]

deleted

[VMI77]

I heard a news commentator state that our servicemen and women are fighting with their very lives to keep us safe and yet we cannot tolerate a little inconvenience in an effort to do the same. But these brave men and women are risking their lives to protect ALL of our freedoms. I think a far worse tragedy would be for our fighting men and women to return home to a country resembling a high tech version of the evil they have been combating.

It's already happening. I got email from a friend reporting on a return flight of our troops from Afghanistan. There were 330 military men and women on the flight, each carrying an M-16, some also carrying M-9 handguns and a few carrying M-240 machineguns. Their ammo had been confiscated and boxed up before they took off from Bagram Airport, and they had all been searched and screened by both the US Customs department and the military flight screeners.

They landed in Indiana to offload 100 members of the Indiana National Guard on their way to their final destination. TSA made all 330 men and women deplane and placed them in a holding area for two hours with no food or water, only a single latrine, while they debated what to do with them. They decided that it wasn't necessary to search their luggage but every service member would have to go through security. They confiscated nail clippers and pocket knives from every member they found them on before they would allow them through security.

So much for fighting for freedom.

Absolutely reprehensible. But it's a pretty clear and dramatic statement about what the politicians in charge really think of the military. No one that isn't part of the ruling class is to be trusted.

[Right2Carry]

For those touting the Israeli method, I think they require people to be at the airport 3+ hours prior to their flights. This may be required in order to be able to do the type of profiling they perform. Given the volume of people travelling in this country and at some of our larger airports, how many do you think will be willing to be at the airport this far in advance?

We don't have the same problems that Israeli's have. They live in a region where the majority of people are muslim.

[The Annoyed Man]

I listened to a very good NPR talk show about this subject.

Experts agree:
1) The TSA is conducting a "theater" of security measures, to prove that they are doing something or to their best ability to screen passengers and avoid airplane hijacking.
2) The serening procedures are introduced reactively to prior events.
3) the serening is not very effective for imagined and hard to detect terrorist acts that can bypass existing security measure. Example, underwear bomb and the body cavity bombs and in the future implanted bombs (all of this were openly discussed on the air)
4) terrorists are observing, testing, and bypassing or avoiding existing security measures.
5) Security measures are VERY VERY expensive.

However, the hard measures introduced resulting in a fact that hijacking airplanes is very tough and not feasible. One major reason cited, a hijacker would beaten till death on any airplane!

As a long time, although no longer emplyed there; "TSA Thug" as someone called me in a different thread, I have to agree, particularly with point 4. Part of my job, for a while, was testing other airports, and I was able to take a .380 through passenger screening 7 times out of 10 tries, and I wasn't even trying very hard.

That said, those who call us, the laid off engineers, retired military, and various other professionals who, due to economic necessity or other factors, found ourselves vastly underemployed at TSA; "Thugs" need to put yourselves in our shoes for a while before calling us names.

I don't know one TSA screener that enjoys patting down a few hundred people a day while being blamed for all of the ills of airline travel - we are there to do a job, a job dictated by YOUR politicians, not by us, and believe me, we know how ineffective pat downs can be.

All TSA pat downs are conducted by same gender personnel, not to say some of them are not gender switchers, and without liberal application of drinking alcohol I don't know any who really enjoy even the prospect, much less the act, of feeling up our fellow man or woman right out there in public while suffering the slings and arrows of the unknowing, and often unwashed, traveling public.

And while I suppose that there might be some twisted souls out there who could raise some sort of reaction to the backscatter pictures, if you really consider what the screeners are looking at, what they are looking for, and how many of those pictures per shift they have to examine, I have to think that the "porn" aspect is only in the twisted minds of those who want to find something to criticize about TSA.

So gripe, abuse, and threaten all you want, but all you are really doing is making it worse for yourselves, because the average screener pretty much agrees with the evaluation that TSA is reactive and pat downs are invasive, but thinks that you are being idiots by objecting to backscatter while getting ready to take a higher dose of radiation while flying on a plane, and every little noise you make while in line merely strengthens their resolve to make the process as uncomfortable for you as it is for them.

Take the bus.

Jim, a thoughtful response, but you're presenting one side of the story, which perhaps was your intention. I don't know.

Here's my reaction. MOST of the TSA security checkin folks are probably like most cops — just trying to their jobs to the best of their understanding of the law, and the best of their training proficiency. Probably a few, just as with a few cops, are thugs who get some kind of sadistic kick out of having the public at their mercy. But I will grant you that most probably are not that way at all. They're just trying to do their job. I don't fly that often, but I do occasionally fly; and in my travels, I have personally witnessed both. Most TSA people I've encountered have been friendly and professional, but I have actually witnessed one thug for whom the best descriptive begins with "a" unnecessarily shouting at and browbeating an old man who had done nothing wrong. This happened right in front of me, and I heard every word of the exchange and saw every action. You'll just have to take my word for it that the TSA guy was way, WAY out of line, and if a supervisor had witnessed it, then he should have been disciplined. This was at Phoenix Sky Harbor. OTH, all the other TSA people I dealt with at that airport were quite friendly. THIS was a jerk, and he needed his butt kicked by someone in authority. On that trip, I was flying to San Luis Obispo, California, out of DFW, and I had to go through a TSA inspection TWICE each way - due to a terminal change at Sky Harbor. The TSA folks at DFW were pleasant and professional without being overly friendly. The TSA folks at San Luis Obispo (a small regional airport) were downright awe shucks friendly - but professional. The TSA folks at Sky Harbor, like I said, were for the most part pleasant and professional - except for this one absolute jerk who wasn't worthy to carry the old man's jockstrap.

But other than that, I don't hold the boots on the ground TSA inspectors responsible for the state of affairs - which state I despise. I hold the departmental leadership of Napolitano and Pistole responsible. Napolitano, who had serious objections (well, she was serious about it, but she wasn't to be taken seriously) objections to enforcing border security when she was Governor of Arizona. In fact, she protested that the building of the fences along the California border was funneling illegals into Arizona, but she didn't give enough of a rip about it to push for building fences in Arizona. And her response to the current conditions along the Arizona/Mexico border is to recommend that citizens of the U.S. do not go closer to the border than 60 miles. In other words, she would rather cede a major portion of the state to Mexico than she would enforce the protection of the border. She is a pimple on the hind parts of progress. And yet this blister of a cow of a toad has no problem subjecting the nation's passengers to measures that she would not countenance being applied to people sneaking into this country illegally. She is not morally qualified for the position she holds.

And Pistole is nothing more than her pit-bull. He's not making any decisions without her permission, and I'm guessing she keeps him on a short leash.

I'm with terryg on this one. Nothing personally against the street level TSA folks, but I'd rather have more freedom, even if it means more danger, than less of it. And my dignity may mean nothing to you, but it means a great deal to me; and those pat-downs ARE demeaning. That doesn't mean that the officer doing the patting down necessarliy likes doing it. They're just doing their job. I would imagine that it is like a urologist giving a male patient a rectal exam. Neither party to the transaction particularly enjoys it. But in the doing of their job, TSA agents ARE robbing passengers of their dignity - whether or not that is their intention. I read one account just yesterday of a young woman who was wearing a skirt experiencing an "enhanced" pat-down. The female TSA agent rapidly ran her hand up the inside of the woman's thigh, and connected with her private parts hard enough to lift the young woman off her heels. She was in tears from the physical pain of the blow, and it took nearly 45 minutes for the pain to wear off. There is simply no excuse for this. It doesn't matter whether or not the young lady was being a "you know what." Striking her in the genitals hard enough to cause 45 minutes of physical pain was unprofessional, and uncalled for. TSA agents are not legally empowered to retaliate by punishing travelers who don't like having to cooperate with intrusive examinations and are therefore somewhat vocal about it.

But, as more and more Americans grow more and more frustrated with the experience, tempers are sure to be closer to the boiling point on both sides of the line. And now that TSA employees are starting to get their backs up, more and more travelers are opting to leave the airport. In retaliation, the TSA has begun filing charges against people who choose to leave the airport rather than complete the procedure. That's just wrong, and I hate them for enforcing a stupid, STUPID policy.

TSA stripping (in public) and searching 8 year old boy at airport
TSA pat-down leaves traveler covered in urine

The Israeli method of handling this is FAR more intelligent. Expensive? Yes, but so is what we already have. Time consuming? Yes, but so is what we already have. Successful? Very successful, and for much longer than we've been doing it. Invasive and undignified? No, nothing like what we have.

We do need air travel security, but the taxpayers deserve better than this. We should be demanding that the Israeli system be put into place here.

[blue]

Baldeagle-
That TSA / returning vets really needs to be Documented and copys sent to each and every one of the congresscritters, and spread far and wide.

ABSOLUTELY A DISGRACE.
THERE SIMPLY IS NO EXCUSE. PERIOD.

That has to be very illegal in someways.

EACH AND EVERY TSA 'person' INVOLVED should be IN JAIL and BANNED from any govn job forever. PERIOD!




Prayers for the Vets.

Regards,
Blue