Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 8, 11, 5:05 pm   #166
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Oh, I agree, but the outcome would have been very different had she said "let me talk to a supervisor, I need my meds."

Let me say it again. The screener was at fault, but the passenger could have resolved it easily and without any fuss - and that is her fault.
How do you know that asking for a supervisor would have resolved it "easily and without any fuss"? Or is that your assumption?
OldGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 8, 11, 6:00 pm   #167
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldGoat View Post
How do you know that asking for a supervisor would have resolved it "easily and without any fuss"? Or is that your assumption?
Not only that but the report I read said she and her husband began asking for names and "people scattered - it was very frustrating".

I wrote my outrage on Babble's Being Pregnant column - any comments/stumble love or whatever would be appreciated.
http://blogs.babble.com/being-pregna...in-medication/

Spreading the word,
Angela <><
AngEngland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 8, 11, 7:52 pm   #168
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: SW Rapid Rewards, Hilton Honors, Marriott, Avis First
Posts: 4,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Oh, I agree, but the outcome would have been very different had she said "let me talk to a supervisor, I need my meds."

I think her concern as soon as she cleared the checkpoint is what to say on GMA. The "granny smuggled a half vial through" pretty much sums up her actions from here on out.

The more vocal amonst this group will never agree with me. The ones who agree with me will just stay quiet in order not to incur the wrath of the vocal bunch.

Let me say it again. The screener was at fault, but the passenger could have resolved it easily and without any fuss - and that is her fault.
This is unbelievably naive.

STSOs on up are regularly complicit in supporting the wrong actions of front line TSOs.

I give you the dreaded NEXUS chat that so many of us have gone through. We show the TSOs, the STSOs, and on up all of the print outs and websites and documents showing the TSA says it accepts the NEXUS, but they won't allow it.

I guess it is partially our fault the TSOs and STSOs and on and on won't accept our NEXUS.

__________________
"And if love is all you're missing... look into your heart. Is anybody home?" - Thomas Dolby
PhoenixRev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 8, 11, 8:33 pm   #169
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Horsemanure.

You guys are so blinded by your hatred of everything TSA that you can't see the bigger picture.

Yes, the screener was wrong for taking it, but the passenger should have said "wait a mnute, I need this stuff and there's a big sign over there that says that it is allowed. Either let me take it or call your supervisor."

You guys are always telling people to stand up for their rights and and belittle them when they aquiesce.

This has nothing to do with being afraid of future harassment, there are too many ways of resolving this issue where she would not be "scared of retribution."

What ever happened to taking responsibility for yourself? If I needed meds that were allowed (per signage at the checkpoint) then no pipsqueak screener will take them from me without an argument.
Why don't we blame her for being diabetic? If caught early enough many diabetics can control it with diet or pills. So she must be at fault for being lazy or incompetant and needing insulin!

CB1111 you are trying to deflect th fault or responsibility of TSA, why may I ask?
rgfloor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 8, 11, 8:51 pm   #170
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 9,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Horsemanure.

You guys are so blinded by your hatred of everything TSA that you can't see the bigger picture.

Yes, the screener was wrong for taking it, but the passenger should have said "wait a mnute, I need this stuff and there's a big sign over there that says that it is allowed. Either let me take it or call your supervisor."

You guys are always telling people to stand up for their rights and and belittle them when they aquiesce.

This has nothing to do with being afraid of future harassment, there are too many ways of resolving this issue where she would not be "scared of retribution."

What ever happened to taking responsibility for yourself? If I needed meds that were allowed (per signage at the checkpoint) then no pipsqueak screener will take them from me without an argument.
That must be one great pair of rose colored spectacles.
Boggie Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 4:41 am   #171
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Horsemanure.

You guys are so blinded by your hatred of everything TSA that you can't see the bigger picture.

Yes, the screener was wrong for taking it, but the passenger should have said "wait a mnute, I need this stuff and there's a big sign over there that says that it is allowed. Either let me take it or call your supervisor."

You guys are always telling people to stand up for their rights and and belittle them when they aquiesce.

This has nothing to do with being afraid of future harassment, there are too many ways of resolving this issue where she would not be "scared of retribution."

What ever happened to taking responsibility for yourself? If I needed meds that were allowed (per signage at the checkpoint) then no pipsqueak screener will take them from me without an argument.
That someone should have stood up for her rights - and her safety - doesn't change the fact that IT'S NOT HER FAULT THE TSA VICTIMIZED HER. Yes, she should have told them, "F**K no, you're not separating me from my medication, get me a supervisor and an actual law enforcement officer over here NOW!" - but there are people out there who are not confrontational. Who not only WILL not, but literally CANNOT engage in confrontation, even or especially with government types. There are people who cannot fathom the notion that government operatives might not give a damn about their (your) health and safety, or their own rules. Those people, if subjected to such treatment, ARE STILL VICTIMS OF WRONGDOING THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN.

If you weren't such an unabashed and dedicated apologist for the TSA here, perhaps you could see that. Way to blame the victim, CB.
erictank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 5:22 am   #172
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Oh, I agree, but the outcome would have been very different had she said "let me talk to a supervisor, I need my meds."

I think her concern as soon as she cleared the checkpoint is what to say on GMA. The "granny smuggled a half vial through" pretty much sums up her actions from here on out.

The more vocal amonst this group will never agree with me. The ones who agree with me will just stay quiet in order not to incur the wrath of the vocal bunch.

Let me say it again. The screener was at fault, but the passenger could have resolved it easily and without any fuss - and that is her fault.
CB, the reality is that often the viewpoint is very different on my side of the belt. Many of us here have had encounters when it comes to medical items stated as permitted on the website. Being polite, calm, and rational simply doesn't always work with TSOs or STSOs, especially when they seem to lack a basic understanding of medical items or issues.

I know from personal experience.
exbayern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 1:16 pm   #173
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgfloor View Post
...CB1111 you are trying to deflect th fault or responsibility of TSA, why may I ask?
Where do you get notion from? It is obvious that the screener was at fault, but I believe (from personal experience - but obviously not with that screener) that she could have easily resolved the issue at the checkpoint - but then we wouldn't be discussing this.

No supervisor would have supported taking the meds. Perhaps they would have made her dump the ice that was melting, but no supervisor would have dumped the meds - unless there is more to this story than we know about.

I don't work TSA, nor do I like their methodology, but they have a crappy mission and are doing it with barely trainable people.
cb1111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 1:33 pm   #174
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
No supervisor would have supported taking the meds.
Are you sure? Randy Pepper, Michael Arato, etc.?

It's painfully obvious that there are TSA supervisors who would have supported taking the meds.
Caradoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 1:33 pm   #175
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 9,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Where do you get notion from? It is obvious that the screener was at fault, but I believe (from personal experience - but obviously not with that screener) that she could have easily resolved the issue at the checkpoint - but then we wouldn't be discussing this.

No supervisor would have supported taking the meds. Perhaps they would have made her dump the ice that was melting, but no supervisor would have dumped the meds - unless there is more to this story than we know about.

I don't work TSA, nor do I like their methodology, but they have a crappy mission and are doing it with barely trainable people.
.....and are doing a crappy job performing their mission.


Finished the sentence for you.
Boggie Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 1:41 pm   #176
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Horsemanure.

You guys are so blinded by your hatred of everything TSA that you can't see the bigger picture.

Yes, the screener was wrong for taking it, but the passenger should have said "wait a mnute, I need this stuff and there's a big sign over there that says that it is allowed. Either let me take it or call your supervisor."

You guys are always telling people to stand up for their rights and and belittle them when they aquiesce.

This has nothing to do with being afraid of future harassment, there are too many ways of resolving this issue where she would not be "scared of retribution."

What ever happened to taking responsibility for yourself? If I needed meds that were allowed (per signage at the checkpoint) then no pipsqueak screener will take them from me without an argument.
Hasn't the government - and TSA in particular - continually crowed about how they are here to "protect" us, and that we are incapable of taking responsibility to protect ourselves? Isn't that the WHOLE BASIS of TSA's existance?
Global_Hi_Flyer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 1:56 pm   #177
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb1111 View Post
Where do you get notion from? It is obvious that the screener was at fault, but I believe (from personal experience - but obviously not with that screener) that she could have easily resolved the issue at the checkpoint - but then we wouldn't be discussing this.

No supervisor would have supported taking the meds. Perhaps they would have made her dump the ice that was melting, but no supervisor would have dumped the meds - unless there is more to this story than we know about.

I don't work TSA, nor do I like their methodology, but they have a crappy mission and are doing it with barely trainable people.
How do you know this? A screener THIS poorly trained is a direct result of a poor supervisor. Why bother to escalate up that chain of command?
TheGolfWidow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 3:44 pm   #178
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Programs: Membership has its benefits, or so I am told.
Posts: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgfloor View Post
Why don't we blame her for being diabetic? If caught early enough many diabetics can control it with diet or pills. So she must be at fault for being lazy or incompetant and needing insulin!
Not that I want to divert this important discussion, but I wanted to point out that type 2 diabetes (which can be controlled by diet/pills) is a different disease than type 1, and I am willing to bet this woman had gestational diabetes, which is a 3rd kind. In type 1, the body, through no fault of the person, does not make ANY insulin and is required to put it in their body, or die. I could lose 20 pounds and I would still need insulin!

A gestational diabetic's organs are working for two and the pancreas can not sometimes meet the need/demand, so the mother must inject or she and/or her fetus will suffer greatly. AND in fact many type 2s are not just lazy and incompetent, but their pancreas has just worn out....it is sometimes a chicken/egg question...as the pancreas begins to wear out, blood sugar rises, but very little gets converted to energy...so you feel hungry and tired, so you eat more, which makes your blood sugar go higher, and yet, you are still hungry, and that soaring blood sugar makes it impossible to get up and walk around, let alone "work out." Endocrine and metabolic meltdown.....

Yes, we are debating TSA, and I am sorry for jumping in, but I do follow these conversations as they are important to me, but let's not cavalierly discuss diabetes and whose "fault" the disease is, if we don't know what it really is (and "most" people don't.....).

thanks
__________________
they call me "smarty pants" cuz the other nickname is not socially acceptable.....
ITravelThereforeIam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 3:53 pm   #179
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 13,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITravelThereforeIam View Post
Not that I want to divert this important discussion, but I wanted to point out that type 2 diabetes (which can be controlled by diet/pills) is a different disease than type 1, and I am willing to bet this woman had gestational diabetes, which is a 3rd kind. In type 1, the body, through no fault of the person, does not make ANY insulin and is required to put it in their body, or die. I could lose 20 pounds and I would still need insulin!

A gestational diabetic's organs are working for two and the pancreas can not sometimes meet the need/demand, so the mother must inject or she and/or her fetus will suffer greatly. AND in fact many type 2s are not just lazy and incompetent, but their pancreas has just worn out....it is sometimes a chicken/egg question...as the pancreas begins to wear out, blood sugar rises, but very little gets converted to energy...so you feel hungry and tired, so you eat more, which makes your blood sugar go higher, and yet, you are still hungry, and that soaring blood sugar makes it impossible to get up and walk around, let alone "work out." Endocrine and metabolic meltdown.....

Yes, we are debating TSA, and I am sorry for jumping in, but I do follow these conversations as they are important to me, but let's not cavalierly discuss diabetes and whose "fault" the disease is, if we don't know what it really is (and "most" people don't.....).

thanks
Thanks for this post. I learned things (always a good thing!),

Makes it easier to understand why checkpoint experiences might differ because the specific type of diabetes dictates what the pax will be carrying.
chollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 11, 6:16 pm   #180
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LAX/CWA/TOA/AUW
Programs: Mileage Plus, SW Rewards, WorldPerks, Barnes and Noble Frequent Buyers
Posts: 368
Here's what BB says at the Blog today:

Quote:
TSA was in the news last week after a passenger alleged we prohibited her from bringing insulin through the checkpoint at Denver International Airport (DEN). While we did search the passengerís bag after an alarm and did not allow an oversized, unfrozen ice pack to be brought on board, (in adherence with the 3-1-1 liquid regulations) our initial review of this incident including interviews with the officers and a review of the CCTV indicates that the cooler contained a sports drink and a melted icepack, but not insulin. Because the passenger stated that she was a diabetic, she was permitted to take the sports drink through the checkpoint.
Truth or Dare, who is telling the truth?
__________________
If there is no wind, row.
Japanese Proverb
AirlineBrat53 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:14 pm.




SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.