Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate - TSA now claims checkpoint photography is prohibited

http://www.pixiq.com/article/tsa-continues-to-forbid-recording-of-checkpoint

See the sign posted at MCO.

Private Screening Advisory
For security reasons, some screening procedures conducted in this area cannot be videotaped or photographed. Please cease any recording or photography if directed by a TSA officer.

You have the option to have somebody accompany you during private screening.

Is anyone surprised?

If I were so hard up that I was forced to accept a job touching other people's junk for a paycheck, and pretended that what I was doing was vital to national security just so I could sleep at night, I wouldn't want my face plastered all over Youtube either.

It has never been allowed to begin with. This is not news.

It has never been allowed to begin with. This is not news.

Wrong. It has always been allowed.

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/taking_pictures.shtm

Of course that does not mean that many passengers have been hassled.

Wrong. It has always been allowed.

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/taking_pictures.shtm

Of course that does not mean that many passengers have been hassled.

My apologies. I clearly stand corrected. I just seem to remember seeing similar signs at various locations.

The sign quoted in the OP seems to refer specifically to the Private Screening. I do not remember anyone saying that the private screening could be photographed.

Then again, if it is truly a private screening, how could it be photographed, except by the witness?

The sign quoted in the OP seems to refer specifically to the Private Screening. I do not remember anyone saying that the private screening could be photographed.

Then again, if it is truly a private screening, how could it be photographed, except by the witness?

I have no doubts that the sign is intentionally vague, to deter all but the most vociferous passengers from trying to film the checkpoint, so-called private area or not.

It has never been allowed to begin with. This is not news.

Wrong. It has always been allowed.

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/taking_pictures.shtm

Of course that does not mean that many passengers have been hassled.

Saul, you fell into the exact trap the TSA set. spades is correct, recordings in private screenings, which are the specific scenarios/locations the sign refers to, have always been prohibited.

Saul, you fell into the exact trap the TSA set. spades is correct, recordings in private screenings, which are the specific scenarios/locations the sign refers to, have always been prohibited.

Then why is the sign posted in the public area?

Even if that is the intention of the sign's wordings -- though as InkUnderNails pointed out, if the private screening is truly private, then other passengers will not be able to see it anyway -- I have no problem envisioning a TSO moving the sign from the private area to the public area to intimidate passengers into not recording.

There is no such thing to prohibited the photographed & Vidotaped. There is no restrictions and it wasn't illegal.

I read it to say that you can't record the groping. Your option is to be groped privately.

Actually, the bigger issue is "...if directed by an officer." This means they can tell you to stop at any time, anywhere, for any (or no) reason.

Let's see if these start to pop up at other airports. If not, I would say that we have a rouge FSD on our hands who must be dealt with -- by us.

I've often seen this policy outside of the US...I guess the TSA does not like poor judgement being recorded... :rolleyes:

I've often seen this policy outside of the US...I guess the TSA does not like poor judgement being recorded... :rolleyes:

They do not mind the recording. It is the distribution of the recording that gets their goat. Well, that and us laughing at them, criticizing them and showing them to be what they are.

I've often seen this policy outside of the US...I guess the TSA does not like poor judgement being recorded... :rolleyes:

That would probably mean no cameras ever, since poor judgement seems to be their standard of excellence. :D

Actually, the bigger issue is "...if directed by an officer." This means they can tell you to stop at any time, anywhere, for any (or no) reason.

1) First they're going to have to show me an officer.

2) Just because they say it doesn't mean it's true - especially when it comes to the duplicity of the TSA and all of its employees.

http://www.pixiq.com/article/tsa-continues-to-forbid-recording-of-checkpoint

See the sign posted at MCO.

Gosh, I wonder who that was that tried to videotape & photograph the lockdown at St Louis (STL) at about 09:55 last wednesday?

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8014/7311575380_ba841da602_h.jpg

They really really really don't like being questioned or held to account. That's all there is to this. It has nothing to do with "security" and everything to do with being a bully and abusing their power because they can.

I read it to say that you can't record the groping. Your option is to be groped privately.

Actually, the bigger issue is "...if directed by an officer." This means they can tell you to stop at any time, anywhere, for any (or no) reason.

Let's see if these start to pop up at other airports. If not, I would say that we have a rouge FSD on our hands who must be dealt with -- by us.

1) First they're going to have to show me an officer.

2) Just because they say it doesn't mean it's true - especially when it comes to the duplicity of the TSA and all of its employees.

The sign says "please." It does not include the usual legal warnings. My response would be, "no, thanks."

In every state but Illinois, including those that are two-party consent states, it is legal to record officers of the law when they are performing their duties. They have no reasonable expectation of privacy in the commission of their duties. In Illinois, while the law making it illegal is still on the books, it was recently declared unconstitutional and is likely to go away in the near future. Multiple courts, when this has been litigated, have stated that there is a first amendment right to record such interactions.

Unfortunately, given that the TSA doesn't really care that the Constitution exists, I'm not sure the above actually matters.

My apologies. I clearly stand corrected. I just seem to remember seeing similar signs at various locations.

Intimidation has long been part of the game.

In every state but Illinois, including those that are two-party consent states, it is legal to record officers of the law when they are performing their duties. They have no reasonable expectation of privacy in the commission of their duties. In Illinois, while the law making it illegal is still on the books, it was recently declared unconstitutional and is likely to go away in the near future. Multiple courts, when this has been litigated, have stated that there is a first amendment right to record such interactions.

Unfortunately, given that the TSA doesn't really care that the Constitution exists, I'm not sure the above actually matters.

But TSA personnel are NOT "officers of the law".

So does that mean they can say "no recording/photography?

But TSA personnel are NOT "officers of the law".

So does that mean they can say "no recording/photography?

They can tell you to do anything they want, legal or not, for two reasons:

1) If you really do want to fly, they can (and will) do everything possible to make your experience unpleasant and to make you miss your flight (early on in the 'random' secondary, you will be asked 'when is your flight?')

2) At many airports, the police take direction from the TSOs. Read up on Phil Mocek's case - evidence was tampered with, the police evicted his bystander (not filming or photographing or interfering in any way) travel companion from the airport and banned him for 24 hours.

Both the police and TSA can, in the short term, do anything they want, legal or not. Do you have the resources to hire an attorney and try to 'stand up for your rights' afterwards? Phil Mocek has gone that route and has prevailed, but not everyone has his tenacity and strength.

Then why is the sign posted in the public area?

Even if that is the intention of the sign's wordings -- though as InkUnderNails pointed out, if the private screening is truly private, then other passengers will not be able to see it anyway -- I have no problem envisioning a TSO moving the sign from the private area to the public area to intimidate passengers into not recording.It's really very simple......

If you post something over and over again and/or have TSO's repeat things which are factually not true and/or contrary to policy, folks will eventually think it's true as it's a person in a uniform who is making the statement ;)-and that is what the TSA wants you believe. :mad:

If you post something over and over again and/or have TSO's repeat things which are factually not true and/or contrary to policy, folks will eventually think it's true as it's a person in a uniform who is making the statement ;)-and that is what the TSA wants you believe. :mad:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

--often attributed to Joseph Goebbels, but certainly part of the general theory of propaganda.

Gosh, I wonder who that was that tried to videotape & photograph the lockdown at St Louis (STL) at about 09:55 last wednesday?



^

I knew I recognized that name when I saw it in the article!

Mike

I've often seen this policy outside of the US.

Other countries do not have a First Amendment like the USA. It is one of the things that really makes the US different and needs to be preserved. The slow chipping away of all ten amendments by goverment and the TSA is a one way street. Once they shred a right it is almost impossible to get it back.

Other countries do not have a First Amendment like the USA. It is one of the things that really makes the US different and needs to be preserved. The slow chipping away of all ten amendments by goverment and the TSA is a one way street. Once they shred a right it is almost impossible to get it back.

Exactly. I wonder, in four weeks, how many Americans will think about what their freedom actually means when they go sing lyrics like, "And I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free". Does the typical citizen of China go about their lives thinking how they live in an unfree society and yearning to move to a free country such as the US?

It would do this country's citizens a lot of good to step away from the barbecue on July 4 and question whether they really are free.

Exactly. I wonder, in four weeks, how many Americans will think about what their freedom actually means when they go sing lyrics like, "And I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free". Does the typical citizen of China go about their lives thinking how they live in an unfree society and yearning to move to a free country such as the US?

It would do this country's citizens a lot of good to step away from the barbecue on July 4 and question whether they really are free.

I offer no more free than those in an average EU country where personal information is more closely guarded and I can transit 27 countries without passing through extended immigration or having to take my shoes off.

I'm American - but less proud than I'd like to be despite once going to school with this sitting president. :(

^

I knew I recognized that name when I saw it in the article!

Mike

And apparently the TSA nor the St Louis airport police department have not learned from their screw-up with Steven Bierfeldt the last time either. Not surprised but quite disappointed things have not changed there.

And apparently the TSA nor the St Louis airport police department have not learned from their screw-up with Steven Bierfeldt the last time either.

Unsurprising. That'd be why they're working at the St. Louis airport in security theatre instead of having real jobs.

TSA isn't near a tough as the Southampton Town Police (http://www.murthalawfirm.com/mother-3-arrested-pictures-tourist-attraction-airport).

1) First they're going to have to show me an officer.

I love how you and I always seem to be thinking the same thing.

"Sir, please stop photographing the checkpoint area."
"Your sign says to stop when a TSA officer tells me to."
"I'm telling you to, sir."
"I know. You're a screener. All of you are screeners. There's no such thing as a 'TSA officer', so unless you can go create a new position and have it signed into law before my flight leaves, I'm going to continue taking pictures of the lovely architecture in this airport."

1) First they're going to have to show me an officer.

TSA Screening Clerks are called “Transportation Security Officer SV-1802-D and E” in their job description.

Following are the areas covered by the Federal 1802 series job classification that was used to create the screener job position.

"OPM Standards

Compliance Inspection and Support Series, 1802
Clerical and Administrative Support Positions

This qualification standard covers positions in the General Schedule that involve the performance of one-grade interval clerical and administrative support work.

OCCUPATIONAL COVERAGE

A list of the occupational series covered by this qualification standard is provided below. The occupational series marked with an asterisk have individual occupational requirements.

GS-029 Environmental Protection Assistant
GS-072 Fingerprint Identification
GS-086 Security Clerical and Assistance
GS-134 Intelligence Aid and Clerk
GS-203 Human Resources Assistance
GS-302 Messenger*
GS-303 Miscellaneous Clerk and Assistant
GS-304 Information Receptionist
GS-305 Mail and File
GS-309 Correspondence Clerk
GS-312 Clerk-Stenographer and Reporter
GS-318 Secretary
GS-319 Closed Microphone Reporting
GS-322 Clerk-Typist
GS-326 Office Automation Clerical and Assistance
GS-332 Computer Operation
GS-335 Computer Clerk and Assistant
GS-344 Management and Program Clerical and Assistance
GS-350 Equipment Operator
GS-351 Printing Clerical
GS-356 Data Transcriber
GS-357 Coding
GS-359 Electric Accounting Machine Operation
GS-361 Equal Opportunity Assistance
GS-382 Telephone Operating
GS-390 Telecommunications Processing
GS-392 General Telecommunications
GS-394 Communications Clerical
GS-503 Financial Clerical and Assistance
GS-525 Accounting Technician
GS-530 Cash Processing
GS-540 Voucher Examining
GS-544 Civilian Pay
GS-545 Military Pay
GS-561 Budget Clerical and Technician
GS-592 Tax Examining
GS-593 Insurance Accounts
GS-675 Medical Records Technician
GS-679 Medical Support Assistance
GS-962 Contact Representative
GS-963 Legal Instruments Examining
GS-986 Legal Assistance
GS-998 Claims Assistance and Examining
GS-1001 General Arts and Information
GS-1046 Language Clerical*
GS-1087 Editorial Assistance
GS-1101 General Business and Industry
GS-1105 Purchasing
GS-1106 Procurement Clerical and Technician
GS-1107 Property Disposal Clerical and Technician
GS-1152 Production Control
GS-1411 Library Technician
GS-1421 Archives Technician
GS-1531 Statistical Assistant
GS-1603 Equipment, Facilities, and Services Assistance
GS-1702 Education and Training Technician
GS-1802 Compliance Inspection and Support
GS-2005 Supply Clerical and Technician
GS-2091 Sales Store Clerical
GS-2102 Transportation Clerk and Assistant
GS-2131 Freight Rate
GS-2135 Transportation Loss and Damage Claims Examining
GS-2151 Dispatching"

I assume "Compliance Inspection" or "Transportation Clerk" is close to what screeners are supposed to do as administrative search clerks.

OTOH a Series 1802 "Mail and File Clerk" seems a long way away from being an armed SWAT Team member on the Front Line in the War on Tewwow. :p

TSA Screening Clerks are called “Transportation Security Officer SV-1802-D and E” in their job description.

I'm well aware of what the TSA's personnel call themselves and each other.

But as was said, "If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Four. Calling it one doesn't make it so."

I love how you and I always seem to be thinking the same thing.

"Sir, please stop photographing the checkpoint area."
"Your sign says to stop when a TSA officer tells me to."
"I'm telling you to, sir."
"I know. You're a screener. All of you are screeners. There's no such thing as a 'TSA officer', so unless you can go create a new position and have it signed into law before my flight leaves, I'm going to continue taking pictures of the lovely architecture in this airport."

Yeah, it will be really funny right up until the moment you are detained and miss your flight because you wanted to have a battle of what their title actually is. Whether you're right or wrong, you're still going to lose.

Yeah, it will be really funny right up until the moment you are detained and miss your flight because you wanted to have a battle of what their title actually is. Whether you're right or wrong, you're still going to lose.

How long have you been an employee of the TSA? Or are you just one of AFS crowd?

The TSA has repeatedly stated they don't "detain" anyone.

Their actions have shown otherwise, of course.

How long have you been an employee of the TSA? Or are you just one of AFS crowd?

The TSA has repeatedly stated they don't "detain" anyone.

Their actions have shown otherwise, of course.

Of course, anyone who disagrees with you must work for the TSA. No, I do not work for the TSA. I'm just someone who picks my battles and would not intentionally provoke the TSA while at the airport.

It doesn't matter what you feel that their title should be. Their title includes 'officer' so if the sign says an officer can ask you to stop photographing then that satisfies the requirements. Whether or not you agree with their title is completely irrelevant.

If I have a problem, I'll write letters, make phone calls, etc... when I get home. There is no point in insulting them over taking architecturally beautiful photos if it could cause you to miss your flight. Right or wrong, if you get detained (or whatever you would like to call it) then you have just wasted a lot of your time. Hey, at least you proved your point, though, right?

Of course, anyone who disagrees with you must work for the TSA. No, I do not work for the TSA. I'm just someone who picks my battles and would not intentionally provoke the TSA while at the airport.

It doesn't matter what you feel that their title should be. Their title includes 'officer' so if the sign says an officer can ask you to stop photographing then that satisfies the requirements. Whether or not you agree with their title is completely irrelevant.

If I have a problem, I'll write letters, make phone calls, etc... when I get home. There is no point in insulting them over taking architecturally beautiful photos if it could cause you to miss your flight. Right or wrong, if you get detained (or whatever you would like to call it) then you have just wasted a lot of your time. Hey, at least you proved your point, though, right?

A lot of the colonists said the trouble makers that were stirring up trouble against the British around 1775 were wasting their time too.

Are you seriously comparing the Keyboard Kommandos of FT to American colonists? I'm not sure how many Revolutionary War fighters lived in their mom's basement and argued with people on the internet for hours on end...

Other countries do not have a First Amendment like the USA. It is one of the things that really makes the US different and needs to be preserved.

Be careful with the chest-thumping. You may crack a rib. And it wouldn't be worth the pain, given how many other countries do in fact have constitutionally protected freedom of expression/speech/press.

Be careful with the chest-thumping. You may crack a rib. And it wouldn't be worth the pain, given how many other countries do in fact have constitutionally protected freedom of expression/speech/press.

Hopefully those other countries do a better job at it than the many US police departments that have suppressed citizens' recordings.

Of course, anyone who disagrees with you must work for the TSA. No, I do not work for the TSA. I'm just someone who picks my battles and would not intentionally provoke the TSA while at the airport.

It doesn't matter what you feel that their title should be. Their title includes 'officer' so if the sign says an officer can ask you to stop photographing then that satisfies the requirements. Whether or not you agree with their title is completely irrelevant.

If I have a problem, I'll write letters, make phone calls, etc... when I get home. There is no point in insulting them over taking architecturally beautiful photos if it could cause you to miss your flight. Right or wrong, if you get detained (or whatever you would like to call it) then you have just wasted a lot of your time. Hey, at least you proved your point, though, right?

"The sign" does not "say" that "an officer can ask you to stop photographing." It actually uses the word "please."

That's because, I suggest, it would be illegal for one to do so. Until there is a report of a person missing their flight because they were taking photographs of an Obedience Conditioning Station, I've still seen no evidence whatsoever that even the TSA now considers such photography to be illegal.

Of course, anyone who disagrees with you must work for the TSA.

Or is part of the AFS crowd. "Anything For Security." Please do try to read for comprehension.

I've still seen no evidence whatsoever that even the TSA now considers such photography to be illegal.

There are many first-hand reports of the TSA attempting to tell people that photography and/or videography at the checkpoint is "prohibited" or "illegal." Try searching Youtube.

Now, whether they actually believe that it's prohibited or illegal is questionable, but they're certainly trying to convince people that it is.

Yeah, it will be really funny right up until the moment you are detained and miss your flight because you wanted to have a battle of what their title actually is. Whether you're right or wrong, you're still going to lose.
You must be new to this whole "antagonizing the Thousands Standing Around" thing. You'd be amazed what you can get away with and still walk onto the plane without any adverse effects. Their security net is so tight that even when I was denied entry for "interfering with the screening process" (I refused to let them photocopy my ID as part of a retaliatory pat-down), I got around the ban by--wait for it--walking to the other side of the airport and using a different checkpoint.

It doesn't matter what you feel that their title should be. Their title includes 'officer' so if the sign says an officer can ask you to stop photographing then that satisfies the requirements. Whether or not you agree with their title is completely irrelevant.
I'll make sure to print out business cards that list my title as "General". Generals outrank officers, right? If they want to have their made-up job description, I'll go ahead and make one up for myself. Bottom line, the only "officers" in an airport are the LEOs and any military who happen to be passing through. A TSO is as much as officer as the garbage you pick up at the grocery store is sushi.

Are you seriously comparing the Keyboard Kommandos of FT to American colonists? I'm not sure how many Revolutionary War fighters lived in their mom's basement and argued with people on the internet for hours on end...
My room is in the attic, thank you very much.

Are you seriously comparing the Keyboard Kommandos of FT to American colonists? I'm not sure how many Revolutionary War fighters lived in their mom's basement and argued with people on the internet for hours on end...

Yes, I am. The word has to be spread somehow, but just spreading the word won't do much, it's going to take action, take people delaying their flights and pushing back. Just sitting around and writing letters after the fact is only part of the equation.

There are many first-hand reports of the TSA attempting to tell people that photography and/or videography at the checkpoint is "prohibited" or "illegal." Try searching Youtube.

Now, whether they actually believe that it's prohibited or illegal is questionable, but they're certainly trying to convince people that it is.

My Youtube search came up with this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9SEv3sN6oU

I trust you have found examples of what you describe. I haven't.

EDIT: found a better Youtube video, "officers" backed down:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8pkKS66UgU&feature=related

Or is part of the AFS crowd. "Anything For Security." Please do try to read for comprehension.



Oh, my apologies for not being up-to-date on all of the acronyms. Again, you're right -- anyone who disagrees with you must either work for the TSA or be part of the AFS crowd!


I'll make sure to print out business cards that list my title as "General". Generals outrank officers, right? If they want to have their made-up job description, I'll go ahead and make one up for myself. Bottom line, the only "officers" in an airport are the LEOs and any military who happen to be passing through. A TSO is as much as officer as the garbage you pick up at the grocery store is sushi.


If you're arguing against someone going beyond their authority then fine. However, arguing over a title is among the more asinine things I've read in this thread. If I get a parking ticket, by a meter maid (We'll say the official title is Parking Enforcement Officer), and the law says only an officer can write me a ticket then does that mean I don't have to pay it? Whether I agree with the ticket or not, if I don't fight it through the appropriate channels then I'm going to lose and eventually get booted. The, "Well, I don't personally recognize the title therefore I don't have to do anything" is absolutely ridiculous.

EDIT: found a better Youtube video, "officers" backed down:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8pkKS66UgU&feature=related

Carlos Miller; http://www.photographyisnotacrime.com/ an excellent website.

Again, you're right -- anyone who disagrees with you must either work for the TSA or be part of the AFS crowd!

Anyone who's willing to put up with the TSA's shenanigans because they're afraid of missing their flight is part of the problem.

So, while you may not be taking a paycheck from the TSA, you're certainly working for them.

I trust you have found examples of what you describe. I haven't.

You haven't found any video showing a TSA employee telling the videographer that they need to turn the camera off?

Anyone who's willing to put up with the TSA's shenanigans because they're afraid of missing their flight is part of the problem.

So, while you may not be taking a paycheck from the TSA, you're certainly working for them.

Of course, I'm working for them as some kind of quasi contractor because I don't see the point in fighting a TSO over his title. If you're going to argue against a real issue (e.g. an overstep of authority) then fine but thinking that your slick because you're going to tell him how he isn't an officer even though you know exactly what a sign means when it says officer is absurd.

In ATC, supervisors are called front line managers even though everyone still calls them supervisors. We all know exactly who they are talking about when a document comes around saying "FLM" but does it matter? No. It doesn't change a thing. Just like air traffic controllers technically aren't air traffic controllers -- we're air traffic control specialists. Does it matter? No.

Find a real issue.

Of course, I'm working for them as some kind of quasi contractor because I don't see the point in fighting a TSO over his title.

Hardly.

You've already said that you're not going to raise any complaint at all against the TSA for fear of missing your flight.

Or, perhaps I should use language more understandable to you:

"Baa. Baaaaa. Baa. Baaa, baaaaaaa baaa, baa baaaa."

You're right...I did. I also said I would write complaints, make phone calls, etc... when I got home. I'm not going to ruin my vacation. I guess you're okay with it, though. Good for you.

You're right...I did. I also said I would write complaints, make phone calls, etc... when I got home. I'm not going to ruin my vacation. I guess you're okay with it, though. Good for you.

Write complaints and make phone calls to whom?

If you make them to the TSA, you might as well not do it at all.

As for vacations, the TSA won't be ruining one for me unless I happen to run into one of those asinine "VIPR" fusterclucks. I don't fly any more. I see no need to pay for the privilege of having my genitals fondled by thieves, thugs, and morons while they're poking through my luggage looking for stuff to steal, all while they're spouting the absolute lie that it's "for my protection."

Write complaints and make phone calls to whom?

If you make them to the TSA, you might as well not do it at all.
Very true. The TSA has a special process for dealing with complaints. First, they put the complainant's name in the "increased chance of SSSS" list. Then, they put the complaint itself in the trash. If it's high-profile enough, they'll issue the cursory, "The TSO acted professionally and in accordance with TSA guidelines," statement to the media and through Bloghole Bob.

Believe it or not, one of the most effective ways to drum up passenger discontent towards the TSA is to verbally disagree with their more asinine or intrusive procedures. I've gotten positive comments from other pax when opting out at a BKSX airport, simply because I respond to the TSO's inevitable safety rant with, "If they're so safe, why won't your agency allow you to wear any form of radiation measurement device to work, even one you've purchased yourself?"

Not too long ago, a one-striper on a power trip decided she was going to go a step beyond checking BPs at the WTMD and started asking people to state their name. She'd already irritated me by barking at me about taking my shoes off before entering "her" line (which, had she looked, she would have seen that I was in the process of doing). When I approached and was told to state my name, I replied, "I'm Spartacus." Hilarity ensued and a threat was made by her to have me "thoroughly searched in a private room" if I ever tried that again. As I was collecting my belongings, the passenger behind me (who I'd been talking to in line) replied, when asked to state his name, that he too was Spartacus. That passenger is now one more person who's been exposed to the idiocy of the TSA, and is that much more likely to have a negative opinion of the organization.

Write to the TSA? No. But if enough complaints make their way onto the desks of Representatives and Senators, we'll see something done. And how do we get those complaints onto their desks? Give people something to complain about. If it takes an argument over semantics when I've got four hours before my flight anyway to make someone else--someone who might send a letter in to their Congresspeople--notice that the TSA is harassing and attempting to detain me over a legal, expressly permitted activity, then I'd say that's time well spent.

As for vacations, the TSA won't be ruining one for me unless I happen to run into one of those asinine "VIPR" blankety-blanks.
I thought VIPR activity had, to date, been restricted to commercial vehicles on highways? Unless subway searches fall under that domain as well. I seem to recall reading somewhere that one of the rail lines into NYC uses MMW screening--am I hallucinating on that?

Are you seriously comparing the Keyboard Kommandos of FT to American colonists? I'm not sure how many Revolutionary War fighters lived in their mom's basement and argued with people on the internet for hours on end...

The "keyboard kommandos" equivalent then were those (then living in what may have been their mothers' cellars) setting type on printers and arguing with others for hours on end at the neighborhood tavern or while at some inn on the road.

Those whom you may wish to mock as "keyboard kommandos" today would have been the mocked "pamphleteers" of yesteryear who so mightily energized a people against the intrusions of a government beyond control.

There is a reason why the DHS/TSA is so obsessed about what Americans critically post about the TSA on the interent. Modern-day equivalent of the "pamphleteers"/communication channel activists are the only opponent the TSA fears. Not a surprise when terrorists are amongst the TSA's best-friends in rank and file, particularly as terrorism give more power to the TSA in a way that TSA critics playing "keyboard kommando" do not.

I thought VIPR activity had, to date, been restricted to commercial vehicles on highways?

In theory.

In practice, VIPR stupidity has been seen in places like Savannah, GA - where the morons were searching people getting OFF of a train.

You're right...I did. I also said I would write complaints, make phone calls, etc... when I got home. I'm not going to ruin my vacation. I guess you're okay with it, though. Good for you.

I go on vacation for experiences that I can share with others who may or may not be part of my travel party. If part of the experience involves not tolerating ridiculously personalized nonsense from the TSA, all the better. The more people that hear a narrative about the TSA's nonsense ways, all the better.

If the TSA tries to get in the way of my work, that may be for all the better. More employers/clients should be pushing back against the TSA's nonsense ways, and that is what would occur if the TSA steps on too many toes of major/strong employers/clients. [The TSA had started to fear that very strong employers/clients may have been getting closer to pushing back against the TSA's nonsense ways that were hitting their employees/hired parties, which is why the TSA has tried buying them off by including many of the biggest US employers' employees in the "PreClear" stupidity.]

You haven't found any video showing a TSA employee telling the videographer that they need to turn the camera off?

I haven't found any video showing a TSA employee attempting to tell people that photography and/or videography at the checkpoint is "prohibited" or "illegal."

So I would treat a sign that says:

"Please cease any recording or photography if directed by a TSA officer."

just like a sign that says:

"Please reveal your breasts if directed by a TSA officer."

or

"Please do a handstand if directed by a TSA officer."

No, thanks.

I haven't found any video showing a TSA employee attempting to tell people that photography and/or videography at the checkpoint is "prohibited" or "illegal."

Here's one of the TSA telling the videographer that photography at the checkpoint is prohibited:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NGMNHnQdoNc#!

The "keyboard kommandos" equivalent then were those (then living in what may have been their mothers' cellars) setting type on printers and arguing with others for hours on end at the neighborhood tavern or while at some inn on the road.

Those whom you may wish to mock as "keyboard kommandos" today would have been the mocked "pamphleteers" of yesteryear who so mightily energized a people against the intrusions of a government beyond control.

There is a reason why the DHS/TSA is so obsessed about what Americans critically post about the TSA on the interent. Modern-day equivalent of the "pamphleteers"/communication channel activists are the only opponent the TSA fears. Not a surprise when terrorists are amongst the TSA's best-friends in rank and file, particularly as terrorism give more power to the TSA in a way that TSA critics playing "keyboard kommando" do not.

I am always quite disappointed when others fail to learn the history of colonial "keyboard commandos". Thomas Paine was quite effective, and that is why I'm very confrontational with each errant screener (or in this case federal security director Wiliam Switzer at STL) and take photos of these encounters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense_(pamphlet)

Impact

There were at least two reasons why Paine's brief pamphlet is believed to be "the most incendiary and popular pamphlet of the entire revolutionary era".[5] For one, while the average Colonist was more educated than their European counterpart, European and Colonial elites agreed that common people had no place in government or political debates. By aiming for a popular audience, and writing in a straightforward and simple way, Paine made political ideas tangible for a common audience. This brought average Americans into political debate, creating a whole new political language.[10] Illiterate colonists could hear Common Sense read at public gatherings, thus bringing even the illiterate into this new political world. Paine's new style of political writing avoided using complex Latin phrases, instead opting for a more direct, concise style that helped make the information accessible to all. Thusly, Paine's "incendiary" words were heard even by those common folk who had never learned to read. The second reason involves the way the vast majority of people felt about the idea of independence from British rule. Except for a few radical thinkers, the people of the colonies were "up on the fence" about freedom. Individuals were in conflict with themselves. There were those who were leaning toward reconciliation with the king. George Trevelyan in his History of the American Revolution had this to say about Paine's pamphlet:

It would be difficult to name any human composition which has had an effect at once so instant, so extended and so lasting [...] It was pirated, parodied and imitated, and translated into the language of every country where the new republic had well-wishers. It worked nothing short of miracles and turned Tories into Whigs.[11]
There were those in high places who, while in agreement with Paine's sentiments, voiced criticism of his method. John Adams, who would succeed George Washington to become the new nation's 2nd president, in his Thoughts on Government wrote that Paine's ideal sketched in Common Sense was "so democratical, without any restraint or even an attempt at any equilibrium or counter poise, that it must produce confusion and every evil work".[12] In spite of Adams' formidable influence, most people praised Paine's brief work. The editors of The Thomas Paine Reader, Michael Foot and Isaac Kramnick, in their introduction to Common Sense wrote:

Published anonymously, Common Sense appeared on Philadelphia streets in January 1776. It was an instant success, and copies of the pamphlet were soon available in all the thirteen colonies. Paine's was an unequivocal call for independence, and many Americans wavering between reconciliation with and independence from Britain were won over to separation by Paine's powerful polemic against monarchy, in general, and the British, in particular.[13]
The impact of Paine's thin little pamphlet upon the general call for independence, upon the other Founding Fathers and their construction of the Declaration of Independence, and upon the common folk, many of whom would soon join General Washington to fight the British military, was quickly spread and deeply felt. The moving words of Common Sense virtually knocked colonists down off the fence and into the fight for freedom of a new nation, into the American Revolutionary War.

[edit]

I am always quite disappointed when others fail to learn the history of colonial "keyboard commandos". Thomas Paine was quite effective, and that is why I'm very confrontational with each errant screener (or in this case federal security director Wiliam Switzer at STL) and take photos of these encounters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense_(pamphlet)

Impact

There were at least two reasons why Paine's brief pamphlet is believed to be "the most incendiary and popular pamphlet of the entire revolutionary era".[5] For one, while the average Colonist was more educated than their European counterpart, European and Colonial elites agreed that common people had no place in government or political debates. By aiming for a popular audience, and writing in a straightforward and simple way, Paine made political ideas tangible for a common audience. This brought average Americans into political debate, creating a whole new political language.[10] Illiterate colonists could hear Common Sense read at public gatherings, thus bringing even the illiterate into this new political world. Paine's new style of political writing avoided using complex Latin phrases, instead opting for a more direct, concise style that helped make the information accessible to all. Thusly, Paine's "incendiary" words were heard even by those common folk who had never learned to read. The second reason involves the way the vast majority of people felt about the idea of independence from British rule. Except for a few radical thinkers, the people of the colonies were "up on the fence" about freedom. Individuals were in conflict with themselves. There were those who were leaning toward reconciliation with the king. George Trevelyan in his History of the American Revolution had this to say about Paine's pamphlet:

It would be difficult to name any human composition which has had an effect at once so instant, so extended and so lasting [...] It was pirated, parodied and imitated, and translated into the language of every country where the new republic had well-wishers. It worked nothing short of miracles and turned Tories into Whigs.[11]
There were those in high places who, while in agreement with Paine's sentiments, voiced criticism of his method. John Adams, who would succeed George Washington to become the new nation's 2nd president, in his Thoughts on Government wrote that Paine's ideal sketched in Common Sense was "so democratical, without any restraint or even an attempt at any equilibrium or counter poise, that it must produce confusion and every evil work".[12] In spite of Adams' formidable influence, most people praised Paine's brief work. The editors of The Thomas Paine Reader, Michael Foot and Isaac Kramnick, in their introduction to Common Sense wrote:

Published anonymously, Common Sense appeared on Philadelphia streets in January 1776. It was an instant success, and copies of the pamphlet were soon available in all the thirteen colonies. Paine's was an unequivocal call for independence, and many Americans wavering between reconciliation with and independence from Britain were won over to separation by Paine's powerful polemic against monarchy, in general, and the British, in particular.[13]
The impact of Paine's thin little pamphlet upon the general call for independence, upon the other Founding Fathers and their construction of the Declaration of Independence, and upon the common folk, many of whom would soon join General Washington to fight the British military, was quickly spread and deeply felt. The moving words of Common Sense virtually knocked colonists down off the fence and into the fight for freedom of a new nation, into the American Revolutionary War.

[edit]

So, you're comparing yourself to Thomas Paine...wow. You must be awesome!

So, you're comparing yourself to Thomas Paine...wow. You must be awesome!

Only you above are comparing him to Paine. Wow. That is not awesome, but claim things however you wish.

"Keyboard kommandos" in basements are a necessary part if your freedom to claim things however you wish is going to remain even at the current levels.

When I approached and was told to state my name, I replied, "I'm Spartacus." Hilarity ensued and a threat was made by her to have me

I'm envisioning a Mr Who and a Mr Watt in line....

TSA: What's your name?
You: Watts' behind me, Whos my name
TSA: What's your name?
You: Watts' behind me, Whos my name
TSA: What's your name?
You: Who
TSA: What's your name?
You: Who
TSA: What's your name?
You: Who
....

Here's one of the TSA telling the videographer that photography at the checkpoint is prohibited:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NGMNHnQdoNc#!

Also:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xwr5iuueFgo#t=84s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YpNM6L2spM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSlf6oCySH0

So, you're comparing yourself to Thomas Paine...wow. You must be awesome!

I compare anyone who writes or speaks, in any format or forum, with everyone else who ever wrote or spoke, in any format or forum, to address the abridgement of liberty and personal abuses foisted upon the People by their government.

Whether you believe "keyboard kommandos" to be as eloquent or effective as people like Thomas Paine, John Adams, Ben Franklin, or Thomas Jefferson, is completely irrelevant. The facts are that these komandos are performing the same function - pontificating upon the virtues of liberty and the abuses of same by their government.

Ridiculing those with whom you disagree is a sad tactic used by those for whom facts fail to prove their points. If you wish to refute that which the komando have written, refute it with facts; using insults, ridicule, or sarcasm alone, without the benefit of any substantive facts, merely makes your arguments ring hollow.

...makes your arguments ring hollow.I've yet to see a pro-TSA* argument that was anything but hollow. I'll wait though.

* please note this is not the same as pro-security (real, that is).

Ridiculing those with whom you disagree is a sad tactic used by those for whom facts fail to prove their points. If you wish to refute that which the komando have written, refute it with facts; using insults, ridicule, or sarcasm alone, without the benefit of any substantive facts, merely makes your arguments ring hollow.

Reminds me of all the people that throw the "you obviously work for the TSA" anytime someone does not agree with them.

Reminds me of all the people that throw the "you obviously work for the TSA" anytime someone does not agree with them.

Real arguments are better, of course. Some posters will be sock
puppets, that's just life on the internet.

on topic - I'm all for sunshine and transparency when it comes
to government, so I have fundamental problems with people trying
to hide things and restrict photography.

You're right...I did. I also said I would write complaints, make phone calls, etc... when I got home. I'm not going to ruin my vacation. I guess you're okay with it, though. Good for you.

Just how often do you go through TSA security theater?

Just how often do you go through TSA security theater?

Not that it really matters, but I probably have gone through 50x over the last 2-3 years.

You see, the thing is, I don't print multiple boarding passes (Just so I can throw away the one I used to get through security), argue with them over how their title should be 'screener' rather than 'officer', and then immediately log into FT so I can then start the latest, "Hehehe...guess what I did?"

Maybe that is why I don't have many bad experiences with the TSA...

Not that it really matters, but I probably have gone through 50x over the last 2-3 years.

You see, the thing is, I don't print multiple boarding passes (Just so I can throw away the one I used to get through security), argue with them over how their title should be 'screener' rather than 'officer', and then immediately log into FT so I can then start the latest, "Hehehe...guess what I did?"

Maybe that is why I don't have many bad experiences with the TSA...

It's always great when you are rewarded for doing everything 'right'.

Unfortunately for me (and a couple family members), we're physically limited to various degrees. Showing up at the checkpoint with a physical limitation that means you can't 'assume and hold' the position in the machine often gets punished because you are not 'doing everything right'. Many TSO's treat us as though we chose our physical limitations just to cause problems at the checkpoint.

Fortunately, one of us is soon to become a 'non-problem', not because the physical ability has lessened or his attitude has changed, it's just because he's about to turn 75.

It's always great when you are rewarded for doing everything 'right'.

Unfortunately for me (and a couple family members), we're physically limited to various degrees. Showing up at the checkpoint with a physical limitation that means you can't 'assume and hold' the position in the machine often gets punished because you are not 'doing everything right'. Many TSO's treat us as though we chose our physical limitations just to cause problems at the checkpoint.

Fortunately, one of us is soon to become a 'non-problem', not because the physical ability has lessened or his attitude has changed, it's just because he's about to turn 75.

I have never suggested that it is okay to penalize people for being handicap. What I am specifically talking about is people who go out of their way to intentionally be difficult and then think it's cute.

What I am specifically talking about is people who go out of their way to intentionally be difficult and then think it's cute.

So, basically every TSA employee?

Maybe that is why I don't have many bad experiences with the TSA...

Congratulations on accepting your training by the new police state.

I have never suggested that it is okay to penalize people for being handicap. What I am specifically talking about is people who go out of their way to intentionally be difficult and then think it's cute.

And I am pointing out that many times 'intentionally difficult' is anyone who encounters a TSO with a chip on his/her shoulder.

"Intentionally difficult' can mean being physically unable to assume and hold the position for the NoS (an 'involuntary medical opt-out').

"ID" can mean being in a wheelchair.

"ID" can mean wanting to keep an eye on one's belongings at the checkpoint.

"ID" can mean traveling only with necessary documents, even if that means one doesn't have a DL or a Costco card to display to the TDC who refuses to accept ID#7 on the TSO's SOP list of valid government-issued IDs.

"ID" can mean being hard of hearing and missing a TSOs barked commands.

"ID" can mean foolishly assuming that checkpoint rules will be the same as the guidelines posted on the TSA website.

Good on you, that you always follow the rules and are fortunate enough to never encounter a TSO with a chip on his/her shoulder. Some of us are not so fortunate, even when we follow the rules.

So, basically every TSA employee?

Congratulations on accepting your training by the new police state.

Yes, yes, yes...of course, I've accepted a police state. Fear profits man nothing unless he's a TSA employee, haha...very good. Now, let me walk into where you work and say, "I think you're a complete idiot. You're a disgrace and have no business having a job. Now, where were we? Oh, yes, would you please help me now?"

Professionally speaking...yes, the answer should be a smiling 'yes'. Realistically speaking, they're human and it is impossible to remove the human element.


Good on you, that you always follow the rules and are fortunate enough to never encounter a TSO with a chip on his/her shoulder. Some of us are not so fortunate, even when we follow the rules.

Clearly, you don't have a chip on your shoulder.

What I am specifically talking about is people who go out of their way to intentionally be difficult and then think it's cute.

I used my NEXUS card for transit through the security area in PHX and was told they didn't accept the ID even though the ID was listed on the TSA website as being valid.

The TSA and a couple of people on this forum said I should have just given the TDC my DL and not be difficult.

Tell me. Is trying to use and ID the TSA is acceptable but their own staff hasn't a clue going out of my way "to intentionally be difficult"?

Clearly, you don't have a chip on your shoulder.

Nope. Nobody is more obsequious than me at a checkpoint. It's all "Sir" and "Ma'am" and I keep my head down. I take my LGA baggie out even when everyone else is leaving it in their bag. I do exactly what I'm told without complaint, except for when I can't.

Example 1: TSO shouts 'All laptops out of the bags' (he's on the other side of the belt. I do not have a laptop. My shoes are off and on the belt, my LGA baggie is out and in a bin, my outwear is out and my shirt is tucked in to keep it close to my body. My eyes are down on my belongings. TSO repeats shout about laptops out. This goes on a couple more times as I move down towards the x-ray, including threat that the xray will catch any laptops and then the offender's bags will be thoroughly checked, body checked, etc. Xray stops, final shout leaning across the belt to me - I realize he's focused on me. I say I don't have a laptop, asked if I have any electronics, repeat about xray catching laptop, consequences, bla-bla. As I proceed for my grope, I see him step over and talk to xray operator as my bags enter the machine. Too bad, there was no laptop in there. I (and everyone else in range) deserved an apology for his rudeness and unprofessional behavior. I kept my head down, took my belongings, went on my way.

Example 2: TSO points me to NoS. I explain that I am physically unable to assume and hold the position. I am told (contrary to what two 'good' TSOs posted here on separate occasions) that I am an opt-out and do I know what that means? I have tried to explain I am not opting out, not one of 'them' ('trouble-makers'). Most recently, at PHX, I was told to demonstrate the limits of my range of motion (I did). I was told to raise my eyes and look at the TSO when she was talking to me. I admit, I have trouble doing this, but I did my best. She said I was an 'opt-out' and I was sent off for my grope.

Example 3: I take out my LGA bag and put it in a bin. Belt-watcher tells me put that away, we don't need it out, we can see it in your bag just fine, yanks my bag back out of the xray, now I have to unlock it to put the LGA baggie away while holding up the whole line. Meanwhile, the signs and videos in the checkpoint area still direct pax to remove LGAs.

Example 4: International flight. I have stripped my bag of anything not needed for the trip - any membership cards, driver's license, etc. Just my passport. Present PP to TDC. TDC needs to see another piece of government-issued picture ID. I only have two, my PP and my DL and I do not carry my DL internationally - why? Just one more item at risk of being stolen. Big harangue, supervisor summoned because 'everyone' should know to travel with extra ID.

I'm not a confrontation person, I don't fill out complaint forms (two bad episodes, one when I was asking for a form to compliment a TSO), I avoid eye contact, but there are still frequent hassles nearly every time I fly - these days, almost always because I can't use the NoS. I often go into the MMW (trying to avoid hassle, demand to show/demonstrate my disability, inability to see bags, deliberate obstruction of sight of bags) - I go into the MMW and then obviously can't assume the position. That at least has the virtue of putting me in a better position (usually) to monitor my bags, I'm going to get the grope anyway, and it saves me the potential hassle of being harassed because I can't use it and, oddly enough, it saves me waiting for a groper, because there's always someone right there to grope and resolve any 'anomaly' (and I'm a complete anomaly to them).

Yes, yes, yes...of course, I've accepted a police state.

Admitting you have a problem is the first step, so you're at least on your way.

Now, let me walk into where you work and say, "I think you're a complete idiot. You're a disgrace and have no business having a job. Now, where were we? Oh, yes, would you please help me now?"

Professionally speaking...yes, the answer should be a smiling 'yes'. Realistically speaking, they're human and it is impossible to remove the human element.

That depends on whether or not I'm hypothetically "working" in a useless position created by the federal government to provide a show of farce to make traveling sheep feel better about getting on a plane.

I might agree with you.

Were I working in a retail establishment or other place where you - the customer - actually had a choice of service, I'd tell you to STFU and GTFO.

However, since nobody trying to fly has a choice as to whether or not to put up with the TSA and their show of farce, I'm of the opinion that whoever chooses to "work" for the TSA deserves whatever derision they get while "working" at the checkpoint.

Clearly, you don't have a chip on your shoulder.

Clearly, I do. I changed jobs after several years of dealing with the TSA and their worthless acts of theatre, just so I wouldn't have to deal with their idiocy four or six times a week.

The TSA and anyone who currently supports them represent a cancer on what used to be a proud nation, now populated with a majority of sheep.

Tell me. Is trying to use and ID the TSA is acceptable but their own staff hasn't a clue going out of my way "to intentionally be difficult"?

The TSA's primary goal is to be "intentionally difficult." One need only look at their lack of competent personnel to understand that one simply can't gather that many idiots in one place without a lot of work.

Not even at a monster truck rally, or on the set of "Jersey Shore."

.. Now, let me walk into where you work and say, "I think you're a complete idiot. You're a disgrace and have no business having a job. Now, where were we? Oh, yes, would you please help me now?"...

the difference being, most of US have jobs that require intelligence and competence and don't require us to feel our customer's sex organs against their wishes.

... since nobody trying to fly has a choice as to whether or not to put up with the TSA and their show of farce, I'm of the opinion that whoever chooses to "work" for the TSA deserves whatever derision they get while "working" at the checkpoint.

This.

The TSA's primary goal is to be "intentionally difficult." One need only look at their lack of competent personnel to understand that one simply can't gather that many idiots in one place without a lot of work.

Not even at a monster truck rally, or on the set of "Jersey Shore."

Heh.

My concern about spades097 comment is that we have seen it on this forum forever. If you follow the rules or the law and some bumbling fool of a TSO tells you/lies to you about the rules or law, if you say anything you are a troublemaker or being intentionally difficult. The hook is always that if you just did what the TSO tells you to do (even if it violates a rule or the law), well, then think how much quicker you will get through security.

Perhaps I missed it, but when did citizenship become equal to acquiescence (except, of course, to the law)?

Perhaps I missed it, but when did citizenship become equal to acquiescence (except, of course, to the law)?

"When you walk into the checkpoint, you give up your Constitutional rights."

I've heard that phrase, or a variation of it, from more than one--way more than one--three-stripers when objecting to TSA procedures.

. . . Now, let me walk into where you work and say, "I think you're a complete idiot. You're a disgrace and have no business having a job. Now, where were we? Oh, yes, would you please help me now?"

Professionally speaking...yes, the answer should be a smiling 'yes'. Realistically speaking, they're human and it is impossible to remove the human element.
. . .

Oddly enough, I got comments like on a regular basis while working 20+ years as an umpire in youth sports. Quite often the people calling me an idiot would change from one dugout to the other depending on how the game progressed. Any yet every night I, and my colleagues were able to ignore the insults and perform our duties in a professional manner.

Of course, there are significant differences between TSA screeners and youth sports officials:

youth sports officials realize that they are there to provide a service, not to exert authority to satisfy their own egos,
youth sports officials actually study the rules they are supposed to enforce,
youth sports officials are quite willing to explain the rules calmly and courteously to anyone who asks,
youth sports officials hold themselves to a professional standard,
youth sports officials who don't measure up have short-lived careers.


If only we could get the TSA workforce to reach the same level of professionalism that pretty much any Little League exhibits!

Of course, there are significant differences between TSA screeners and youth sports officials:

youth sports officials realize that they are there to provide a service, not to exert authority to satisfy their own egos,
youth sports officials actually study the rules they are supposed to enforce,
youth sports officials are quite willing to explain the rules calmly and courteously to anyone who asks,
youth sports hold themselves to a professional standard,
youth sports officials who don't measure up have short-lived careers.




Permit me to add:

Youth sports have published sets of rules to which everyone must comply equally and are universally available for inspection and study.

Permit me to add:

Youth sports have published sets of rules to which everyone must comply equally and are universally available for inspection and study.

Of course the biggest difference is one that I left unsaid but I will say now.

Contrasting TSA with youth sports leagues may seem like comparing apples to oranges. However; there is an important lesson to be gained from the leagues.

We often hear on this forum and elsewhere from TSA employees and apologists that the TSA screener's job is stressful, that the screener has to contend with rude passengers and that the many checkpoint rules are hard for TSO's (especially TDC's) to remember. These arguments are used to excuse belligerent TSO's, inconsistent practice and ignorance of TSA's own guidelines by screeners.

However; the overwhelming number of youth sports leagues in this nation demonstrate that it is possible to train individuals to perform a technically difficult, physically demanding task, in a stressful environment, to a high degree of competence; and to do it with professionalism and courtesy. Sports leagues are not unique in this. There are countless companies, organizations and government agencies that do the same. I use sports leagues because that is something I am familiar with.

Why is something that (mostly) volunteer organizations can do year in and year out (all the while with a high turnover of personnel) somehow beyond the ability of TSA to accomplish in 10 years of existence and money by the truckload?

I think the answer is simple. The vast majority of people in sports leagues generally have a culture of "I want to do a good job and I will put effort into the job I do." I strongly suspect that the vast majority of TSA employees, from top to bottom, do not.

I'm of the opinion that whoever chooses to "work" for the TSA deserves whatever derision they get while "working" at the checkpoint.


I use their own line against them:

If they don't like it, they can find a new job.

I think the answer is simple. The vast majority of people in sports leagues generally have a culture of "I want to do a good job and I will put effort into the job I do." I strongly suspect that the vast majority of TSA employees, from top to bottom, do not.

I strongly suspect that anyone with anything resembling an actual "work ethic" as described wouldn't be "working" for the TSA.

If they don't like it, they can find a new job.

If they could find a new job, they wouldn't be working for the TSA...