Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

2012 Survey: How Effective is the Transportation Security Administration?

2012 Survey: How Effective is the Transportation Security Administration?

Old Aug 16, 2012, 4:57 am
  #61  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 436
Police officers actually stop criminals. TSA screeners don't stop terrorists. There are so many loopholes in TSA security that any terrorist could penetrate them, first and foremost being that the body scanners don't work (see my video below).

Originally Posted by sokolov
How so? Sounds like saying that a lot of police on the street makes you feel safe.

Obviously, if a strong police presence is necessary, it must be a very unsafe place/situation.
--Jon
Affection is offline  
Old Aug 16, 2012, 5:17 am
  #62  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Programs: QFF
Posts: 5,304
Originally Posted by Affection
Police officers actually stop criminals. TSA screeners don't stop terrorists. There are so many loopholes in TSA security that any terrorist could penetrate them, first and foremost being that the body scanners don't work (see my video below).
I tried using that little fact, along with your video proof, with the Australian politicians. They ignored it .
Himeno is offline  
Old Aug 16, 2012, 10:09 am
  #63  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,937
Originally Posted by Himeno
I tried using that little fact, along with your video proof, with the Australian politicians. They ignored it .
Follow the money.
You can be certain that the current coalition (including the Greens) have been richly rewarded by device manufacturers and security companies for their trampling of individual liberties.

Hypocrisy knows no bounds, it seems.
zombietooth is offline  
Old Aug 16, 2012, 10:35 am
  #64  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,937
Originally Posted by Affection
Police officers actually stop criminals. TSA screeners don't stop terrorists. There are so many loopholes in TSA security that any terrorist could penetrate them, first and foremost being that the body scanners don't work (see my video below).



--Jon
I read through your blog.
Outstanding!^

Keep up the good work.
zombietooth is offline  
Old Aug 17, 2012, 8:34 am
  #65  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tyler, TX
Programs: AA Executive Platinum; HHonors Diamond; National Executive Elite
Posts: 137
Originally Posted by Affection
Police officers actually stop criminals. TSA screeners don't stop terrorists. There are so many loopholes in TSA security that any terrorist could penetrate them, first and foremost being that the body scanners don't work (see my video below).



--Jon
How many times have we seen this argument (and others like it)? And yet, no planes have been blown up by terrorists since 9/11. If you think it is because the terrorists are no longer interested in doing so, you are dreaming!! Is it SOLELY because of passenger screening? Of course not. But that is one part of the equation, and one that I am willing to endure when traveling.
rabtech is offline  
Old Aug 17, 2012, 9:53 am
  #66  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 32,113
Originally Posted by rabtech
Is it SOLELY because of passenger screening? Of course not. But that is one part of the equation, and one that I am willing to endure when traveling.
Causes me no pain … maybe max 5 minutes of my life standing in line a few times a year.

But then the UK doesn't have a written Constitution that gives us Brits "Rights". We just have a succession of [perceived] inept Governments doing the best they can with the resources and budget available.

Hey … here's a concept. Scrap the whole of TSA and CBP … and just let folks get on with whatever happens. Saves billions, avoids endless Internet whining and reduces lines at airports.

Any takers? No cherry-picking, mind
T8191 is offline  
Old Aug 17, 2012, 11:57 am
  #67  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Indiana
Programs: Avis First, Marriott Plat Prem, AA Gold, Southwest A Preferred
Posts: 1
I don't really have a problem with the TSA as a whole. However, I do question some of the things they do. I fly into a relatively small airport on business. The normal staffing that I've seen is about 8 or so agents on any given afternoon for a single scanner. Then, I hand them my boarding pass and identification. They ask me to state my name. I don't get it. What if I pronounce my name differently than they expect? I don't feel any safer at the gate knowing we all could say our name. Then, they come out into the gate area and ask to go through our bags again. Like I said before--I don't get it.
redenbacher is offline  
Old Aug 17, 2012, 12:20 pm
  #68  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 32,113
Hey, welcome to FT ^

Look, we all have different perceptions. Some are sensitive about screening, some scream the (whichever) Amendment and some get on with it and avoid a coronary

What did amuse me, only yesterday, when looking at the CBP website was their link to Airport Wait Times arriving at International Airports. They cited, for the time we always arrive at IAD, "Average Booths Open = 51".
Hahahahaha ... Usually 5 for US pax, 5 for us Foreign people and 1 for Crew. BTW, that's a figure that stands for the last 6 years or so.

They built 50+ booths, but they don't have staff to look after them. And I do love the broadcast, at around 2pm, that weve heard several times saying "Overtime is now authorised" ... at which point those who don't want to work any more just close down and disappear.

Sadly, when you get that sort of Corporate statistic, published on the CBP Website, it's hard to take anything seriously. I just ride the storm ... It's your country.
T8191 is offline  
Old Aug 17, 2012, 1:19 pm
  #69  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,937
Originally Posted by rabtech
How many times have we seen this argument (and others like it)? And yet, no planes have been blown up by terrorists since 9/11. If you think it is because the terrorists are no longer interested in doing so, you are dreaming!! Is it SOLELY because of passenger screening? Of course not. But that is one part of the equation, and one that I am willing to endure when traveling.
Show me one shred of evidence that the TSA is effective in preventing smuggling weapons/explosives on board. They fail test after test that the government conducts. They steal guns and other items and easily conceal their crimes in "secure" areas. I especially like the following post by a 25-year FBI agent and expert in aviation security, who writes that the "TSA has never foiled a terrorist plot or stopped an attack on an airliner" and that "the entire TSA paradigm is flawed."

See here: http://epic.org/privacy/airtravel/backscatter/

I posted links to hundreds of stories about their incompetence in a previous post (#17). You should read through them before you decide if the inconvenience of being irradiated/groped/intimidated/harassed every time you go to the airport is worth it.

I find it comical that the public and media are concerned about radiation from the Fukushima disaster reaching America, which is a very tiny potential amount, yet seem blithely content to be irradiated every time they enter a body scanner.

Also, I am amazed at how concerned the British seem to be about the current phone-hacking scandal in GB yet don't seem to care that the TSA has the right (and the ability with a special device at some locations) to hack the phone of any passenger that passes through screening and retrieve 100% of your private information contained thereon--Big Brother at his best.

See here: http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/0...utes?sdsrc=rel

Last edited by zombietooth; Aug 17, 2012 at 6:24 pm
zombietooth is offline  
Old Aug 18, 2012, 4:20 pm
  #70  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL DM, Marriott TE, and Reformed AMEX Cent
Posts: 332
On 9/11 I was a stock trader on Wall St. I saw people die that day (that's all I will say about my experience).

Notwithstanding my intimate experience that day I think anyone who thinks the TSA is a good use of money is a fool. Now that cockpit doors are locked there is no longer ANY NEED for the TSA.

Sure a terrorist could blow up a plane killing everyone on board (and perhaps many on the ground) but come on, a plane is probably at most 5th on the list of likely targets these days.

Anyone with half a brain realizes that the subways are 100 times more likely to be hit now than an airplane yet we get on subways without any security. A group of 5 terrorists could carry 500lbs of explosives onto the 4 train - wait until it goes under the east river and then blow it up - at the same time another 5 terrorist could blow up a NJ Transit train under the Hudson River.
Or they could blow up a greyhound bus as it headed over the George Washington Bridge.

We drive over bridges; ride buses, subways and trains all without the TSA. Please explain to me why we need the TSA again??? When we live in fear the terrorists win.

Last edited by Harlem; Aug 18, 2012 at 8:33 pm
Harlem is offline  
Old Aug 18, 2012, 5:32 pm
  #71  
dc3
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 261
The people who believe the TSA is doing a good job also believe in the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and give the US Congress a 99% approval rating.
dc3 is offline  
Old Aug 18, 2012, 5:33 pm
  #72  
dc3
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 261
Originally Posted by Harlem
On 9/11 I was a stock trader on Wall St. I saw people die that day (that's all I will say about my experience).

Notwithstanding my intimate experience that day I think anyone who thinks the TSA is a good use of money is a fool. Now that cockpit doors are locked there is no longer ANY NEED for the TSA.

Sure a terrorist could blow up a plane killing everyone on board (and perhaps many on the ground) but come on, a plane is probably at most 5th on the list of likely targets these days.

Anyone with half a brain realizes that the subways are 100 times more likely to be hit now than an airplane yet we get on subways without any security. A group of 5 terrorists could carry 500lbs of explosives onto the 4 train - wait until it goes under the east river and then blow it up - at the same time another 5 terrorist could blow us a NJ Transit train under the Hudson River.
Or they could blow up a greyhound bus as it headed over the George Washington Bridge.

We drive over bridges; ride buses, subways and trains all without the TSA. Please explain to me why we need the TSA again??? When we live in fear the terrorists win.
dc3 is offline  
Old Aug 18, 2012, 5:33 pm
  #73  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 175
Originally Posted by T8191
Causes me no pain maybe max 5 minutes of my life standing in line a few times a year.

But then the UK doesn't have a written Constitution that gives us Brits "Rights". We just have a succession of [perceived] inept Governments doing the best they can with the resources and budget available.

Hey here's a concept. Scrap the whole of TSA and CBP and just let folks get on with whatever happens. Saves billions, avoids endless Internet whining and reduces lines at airports.

Any takers? No cherry-picking, mind
Our Constitution doesn't give us rights. It is supposed to protect our inalienable rights from an overreaching government.
Rondall is offline  
Old Aug 18, 2012, 8:01 pm
  #74  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Programs: AA EXP 3MM, FB Plat, AS Gold, Marriott Gold, Fairmont Plat, BA wannabe
Posts: 684
Originally Posted by Rondall
Our Constitution doesn't give us rights. It is supposed to protect our inalienable rights from an overreaching government.
...and it's here where most of our frustrations reside.

The TSA is the most visible example of an overreaching government in our generation.
fishferbrains is offline  
Old Aug 19, 2012, 7:12 am
  #75  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,329
Originally Posted by T8191
As a leisure traveler, I only get exposed to TSA 4-6 times a year.

Never been touched, fondled, interfered with, wanded or scoped.

But then I do ensure that everything metallic goes in the trays. At which point, whether in the USA or UK, I never seem to have a problem.
I'm also a leisure traveler and only fly 1-2 times per year. Likewise, I have always been very careful about emptying my pockets and minimizing any possibility that I might get pulled aside for secondary screening. I don't opt-out, because my home airport has MMW (which they use as primary) and my destination airport has never selected me for BSX.

I have also never been touched, fondled, or interfered with.

But even so, scope and grope, the name game, and enhanced interrogations offend me as an American. People have rights, the most important of which are spelled out simply and unequivocally in the Constitution, and the TSA violates the rights of millions of people per day.

I'm not one of those who dismisses government violation of the Constitution as unimportant just because it's not happening to me.

Originally Posted by T8191
@ jonsg ... Interesting post, espcially later on when you mention the "dim terrorists". During the many decades of IRA Terrorism in the UK it was called the "Paddy Factor", but it still didnt prevent them from being rather effective and killing many hundreds of passers by ... Innocent civilians, if you will. Especially clever when you consider that 2 of their main players now hold high office in Northern Ireland. Dim, eh? Perhaps not.

There are many players in this "game" ... Some are clever, some innovative, some careless and some just want their 40 virgins ( or whatever the scale of issue is these days). I never under-rate any of them, nor the risk that they represent. I've survived 2 bombings, and had a good friend murdered on his front doorstep. TSA or whoever is better than having to experience that again, thank you.
I'm sorry for your loss. TSA is not doing anything to prevent it from happening again.

But it is doing irreparable damage to our way of life. "Anything is better than nothing" is an absurd premise upon which to establish government procedures that destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms upon which our entire society was built.

Originally Posted by T8191
So good he had to say it twice …

But but but … "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this article if you can. (January 2009)". Not perhaps the greatest reference for the case.

There is little doubt in my mind that terrorism, in whatever form you choose to define it, has had a fiscal impact across the World. Nor will I deny that some of the dancing around at Airports and Borders that we are ALL subjected to has a questionable impact.

Nevertheless, I have no fear of flying: I know that "things are being done" here, there and everywhere. Whether TSA is a major contributor to that safe feeling, I am not qualified to quantify. Criticising TSA may, indeed, become an Olympic Sport in the future, given the fixation so many US Citizens seem to have with it … perhaps with Baseball, to appease the Media companies?


Personal Note: We flew UK>USA on 24 Sep 01. 9/24, if you must. The BA 744 to IAD was less than half-full, and for the next few weeks around DC people were amazed that we had risked flying to the US at all. How sad.

Suggestion: Grow balls: it's infinitely better than Blogging or writing to your Congressman. Then you just get on with life. It's not that difficult, even for this Senior Citizen. But then the UK doesn't have a written Constitution, giving me 38,284 things to complain about … I just get on with life, or at least what little remains to me.
Suggestion: Grow balls. Stop being so afraid of terrorism that you're willing to sacrifice the fundamental rights and freedoms of millions of people just to make yourself feel a little less terrified of some big bwown Muswim bogie-man.

Besides, being a Briton, you don't exactly have a lot of dogs in this fight, do ya? It's not YOUR way of life that you're willing to sacrifice, since you don't have a written Constitution that protects your rights and freedoms and the British don't seem to have as firm a belief in such rights and freedoms as Americans.

Originally Posted by mahler58
Bin laden helped create more jobs in the US
and the west than any other world leader.
The security industry has exploded as a result
of his efforts. His positive impact on the
economy should not be forgotten may he
rest in peace.
For every job he created in the TSA, he destroyed 1 or two in the travel industry.

Originally Posted by rabtech
How many times have we seen this argument (and others like it)? And yet, no planes have been blown up by terrorists since 9/11. If you think it is because the terrorists are no longer interested in doing so, you are dreaming!! Is it SOLELY because of passenger screening? Of course not. But that is one part of the equation, and one that I am willing to endure when traveling.
I call BS.

It's been 11 years since 9/11, and no planes have been knocked out of the sky. But how many planes were blown up in America by terrists in the 11 years BEFORE 9/11? Hm? Zero? And that was before TSA, before scope and grope, before the liquids ban, before the shoe carnival... Was it solely because of passenger screening? I think not.

It was because interest in attacking US aviation was minimal. It still is.

Even 9/11 wasn't an attack on US aviation. It was an attack on 3 targets - the World Trade Center (which Bin Laden particularly lusted after), the White House, and the Pentagon. They used the planes as weapons, not as targets.

I'm firmly convinced that Bin Laden only added the White House and Pentagon to the target list of 9/11 as a recruiting tool, to gain him enough suicidal jihadists to make the attack work; if he had been set on attacking only the WTC again, his pool f potential human bombs would have been much smaller.

Originally Posted by Harlem
On 9/11 I was a stock trader on Wall St. I saw people die that day (that's all I will say about my experience).

Notwithstanding my intimate experience that day I think anyone who thinks the TSA is a good use of money is a fool. Now that cockpit doors are locked there is no longer ANY NEED for the TSA.

Sure a terrorist could blow up a plane killing everyone on board (and perhaps many on the ground) but come on, a plane is probably at most 5th on the list of likely targets these days.

Anyone with half a brain realizes that the subways are 100 times more likely to be hit now than an airplane yet we get on subways without any security. A group of 5 terrorists could carry 500lbs of explosives onto the 4 train - wait until it goes under the east river and then blow it up - at the same time another 5 terrorist could blow up a NJ Transit train under the Hudson River.
Or they could blow up a greyhound bus as it headed over the George Washington Bridge.

We drive over bridges; ride buses, subways and trains all without the TSA. Please explain to me why we need the TSA again??? When we live in fear the terrorists win.
Sorry, Harlem, but I have to disagree with you.

Given that there is virtually no screening to board mass transit anywhere in the US, if mass transit actually was such a Prime Target (TM), there would have been attacks on it by now.

In the days following 9/11, the term Prime Target (TM) entered the public lexicon as everyone in the US tried to work out what the twisted fanatical minds of al Qaeda would attack next. Such things as sporting events, shopping malls, tall buildings, national monuments and museums, theme parks, and mass transit - all places where many people gather or places with some cultural, social, or historical significance - were all given the spurious label of Prime Target (TM) by folks who really didn't understand their enemy.

But none of those places had attacks in the last 11 years, did they? The closest anyone came to actually attacking one of those Prime Targets (TM) was when some idiot placed a poorly-constructed car bomb on a busy street in NYC and then ran for the airport to get away.

So, again, I have to call BS, on the entire notion that foreign terrists are all sitting desert caves plotting dastardly new attacks on American soil.

And I also don't agree that we don't need any sort of TSA. I think we do need a set of federal guidelines to make airport screening uniform, and to limit the number and types of searches performed on travelers. But it's the current paradigm of pseudo-law enforcement activities, with paramilitary trappings on poorly trained minimum wage screeners, massive bureaucracy, and secret rules and regulations, that is the problem.

TSA should never have former law enforcement people in its top ranks. They always approach their jobs from the perspective that individual rights of suspects are of no importance, and catching Bad Guys (ANY Bad Guys, not just terrists) is more important that preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution.
WillCAD is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.