CashN

TSA is one step below the DMV in terms of talent. I always feel safe watching these folks in action.

gsoltso

I can not answer the questions at the end because I do not have a comprehensive list of either types of incident.

I will simply say that the AIT system gives TSA a better chance to discover non-metallic items, in addition to discovering metallic items - the WTMD only finds metal items. The most dangerous item to an airplane in the air, is an explosion (at least for the purpose of this discussion), and while there are explosive substances that have metallic implements and elements, most explosives do not have metal as a primary component in large quantities. So, AIT finds items that are non-metallic where the WTMD does not.

Yeah, I have never done that - oh, with the exception of the trip where I couldn't find my license, and that was before the TSOs were operating the TDC position. You are welcome to keep guessing at what I do or do not do when I travel - if you so desire.

Of course, when I go through the checkpoints, I am open, friendly and smile a lot - 99 times out of a hundred, when I smile at the folks working those checkpoints, I get the same back . My last time through DFW I had some some TSOs suggest the better place to eat down in the gate areas. I have literally had zero problems in a checkpoint since I began traveling by air at the age of 18 (which was many summers ago...) and that includes several airports outside of the United States.

FliesWay2Much

Actually, false alarms are good for the TSA. These enable the TSA to keep the fear level up, especially when the citizens see other citizens being pulled aside for friskings, their luggage searches, and, the occasional citizen being escorted off to further interrogation.

halls120

I'm willing to accept your assessment that your "back end" operations are light years ahead of where they were. The problem is that your front-facing ops - with the exception of PreCheck at airports where is it physically separate from the regular screening lanes - aren't materially different from what they were a decade ago. Your colleagues are still barking at passengers, and as others have noted, you employ grossly invasive, ineffective, and inefficient technology your primary screening mechanism - carried out in far too many cases by surly employees with chips on their shoulders.

gsoltso

I can not argue with some of this summation. I even alluded to that in a previous comment. All it takes is one TSO to bark out orders or behave in an unprofessional manner and every single passenger traversing that area has a lasting impression of negativity.

I will have to come down on the side of the AIT simply because it has a better chance of catching non-metallic items, such as explosives - of course, I hate the LAG ban with a bleeding passion, so I am a bag of contradictions according to some of my co-workers. I am unable to argue much on that point because I try to stick to things I can post links for (you know, running afoul of non disclosure or SSI regulations can be detrimental to my continued employment!). So here is a list of information TSA has put out, and then I will bow out of this particular part of the discussion...

http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-informat...ing-technology
http://www.tsa.gov/ait-how-it-works
http://www.tsa.gov/ait-frequently-asked-questions

Please keep in mind the list of airports with AIT may be not comprehensive on the FAQ page. (A request for clarification has been sent to HQ to see if we are in fact missing one.)

**After reviewing, and speaking with some folks, the list is actually up to date - I simply miscounted.**

Surly TSOs (or other employees) are one of my pet peeves - I was at work the day when a very close family member passed away, and I was running break-neck speed to get out of the airport to get to family and still gave polite directions to someone. Now, I do not necessarily expect that from everyone, but I do expect them to be professional and follow the SOP every single day. It is written in the job description, and those that can not be professional, should not be here.

pontifex

You're a writer for your agency's blog which has in recent years featured a weekly "police blotter" post listing everything you're claiming is a "big find" from that week's searches. Has a single one of those blotter entries EVER included an explosive device? Or are you going to come up with another pathetic dodge to avoid telling the truth, which is that the answer is no, and that the number of explosive devices found by the nude body scanners is zero?

And just to refresh your memory on travelers left covered in their own urine thanks to the actions of your agency and your fellow screening clerks:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tsa-pat-...ered-in-urine/

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/40291856/n...covered-urine/

Dovster

Why the plural "travelers left covered in their own urine" when you have only posted about one traveler?

Separate links about the same incident do not make it multiple incidents.

jkhuggins

I will forgive pontifex for posting the wrong link: it turns out that this same person was left covered in his urine on two separate incidents. Here's a link to an article describing the second event:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...ticle-1.157609

So technically, that's only "one" traveler, but it happened to him twice.

DeafBlonde

TSA = Untrainable