Randyk47

I was having a beverage or two at my local pub this weekend and the MSY and TSA situation came up. Now admittedly there aren't a lot of frequent flyers at the pub but I was a bit surprised how many, out of 10 or so people in the discussion at the bar, thought that TSA agents were police and some even thought they were armed. Kind of a "they have badges don't they" rational.

I actually hadn't paid much attention, though it was in the back of my mind, that few airports actually have police stationed at security check points. Did some research this morning and discovered that DHS and TSA dropped the requirement to have police stationed at every checkpoint about five years ago. Locally the airport authority didn't want to fund stationing officers at the checkpoints and DHS/TSA wouldn't fund so they disappeared.

jkhuggins

They just might ... if, in fact, The Powers That Be require that any TSOs licensed to carry firearms on duty complete the same level of professional training required of armed LEOs.

As I've said before ... it's conceivable that allowing TSOs to carry firearms might actually be the best thing that could happen to professionalize TSA, and point out the differences between TSOs and LEOs.

GUWonder

More armed TSA employees will increase the odds of another unarmed person being shot and injured or killed by USG employees at US airports.

We got the "federalize to professionalize" line when it came to airport screeners, and we know where that has led. Now you want us to get on board the the "LEOize/arm to professionalize" line? I know where that will lead us too. No, thank you.

petaluma1

Did you set them straight and, if so, what was the reaction?

petaluma1

^^

Randyk47

Best I could. One of the more vocal "TSA are armed agents" folks was shall we say well fortified with processed grain beverages so he wasn't in a receptive mode. Luckily I wasn't the only person trying to correct the misunderstanding so I think we generally made some understand.

Ysitincoach

Riiiiight, because having the unarmed passenger as a buffer between TSA clerks and LEOs is working oh so well right now.

FliesWay2Much

What do they say about great minds????

Boggie Dog

Actually the incidence of armed people creating a situation at airport checkpoints is so low that it really isn't a problem that needs to be acted on. The procedures and policies in place today are adequate.

Moving the police up or arming TSA screeners are both ideas in search of a problem.

GUWonder

That wouldn't surprise me. And now way more people believe that there are lots of cops at airports because the TSA's uniforms and badges were made to make them look like "cops".

"Suicide by cop" gets so much more attention nationally when an airport is involved, and so someone seeking attention in death has it.

Ysitincoach

Really isn't a problem that needs to be acted on? Incidents at MSY, LAX, CLE, CMH, you're probably at a point where you have a far greater chance of being shot in the crossfire by airport police than you are involved in some incident on an aircraft.

Even securitized buildings like courts and government buildings, you see a heavy police presence prior to entering than you do past their checkpoint.

What's it hurt in trying to have LEOs on both sides of the checkpoint? Not just one.

Boggie Dog

I am aware of the LAX incident, can you enlighten me on the other two?

Putting police out in front of the checkpoint could have the effect of having the police chasing the bad actor into the crowd of people at the checkpoint.

The most likely thing that is going to happen when you have a crowd of people and police with guns drawn is that innocent bystanders are going to get hurt. Driving the actor away from the checkpoint would be a safer course of action.

That still leaves the point that these things happen so seldom that little more than reviewing policies and action plans need to be done.

You picked out 4 incidences that happened over what time period? Is this a bigger threat to your safety than say some guy sharing the roadways with you while en-route to the airport?

JumboJet

Last thing I want is to deal with some power-tripping TSA agent with a gun.

Also I think Roach Spray would be much more effective against TSA agents

GUWonder

Do most TSA employees want some of their hot-headed, short-fuse colleagues to be armed while at work? I can foresee TSA workplace shootings increasing with a more flexible allowance for TSA employees to have guns at work.

WillCAD

Really really. Well, let me qualify that - aside from the armed police officers already in place, and the extensive training that they already receive in active shooter scenarios, nothing more extensive or elaborate or dramatic needs to be done. This is a problem only in the same way that death by bear attack is a problem. It happens. But it happens incredibly seldom and it's ridiculous to put more attention on it than it deserves.

Assuming for a moment that's true, you still have a far greater chance of being struck by lightning, bitten by a shark, or crushed under a falling piece of furniture than you do of being killed, injured, involved in, or even witnessing an airport terminal attack of this nature - whether genuine terrorism or simply suicide by cop.

Completely unfair comparison, since courthouses, by their nature, have a high presence of both convicted criminals and the accused, in high-animosity situations which breed anger and violence. It's a powder keg, compared to which the "stress" of going through security and getting on an airplane is a joke.

They're already on both sides of the c/p.

Admittedly, my experience in airports is quite limited, especially compared to the many frequent fliers here on FT who have transited dozens of airports big and small, while my paltry half-dozen pale in comparison, but all of the airports I've transited have used the roving patrol paradigm in their armed policing strategy. It takes far fewer officers to cover a larger area if they're mobile, and it removes some of the risk of myopic boredom from sitting in one spot for hours on end, which seems to plague TSA.

The idea of permanently placing armed police at both the entrance and exit of each c/p in the country is ludicrous, both because of the enormous cost involved, and because it wouldn't do a darn thing to reduce casualties in an active shooter incident.

So, to answer your question - What's it hurt? 1) It costs more. 2) It erodes situational awareness. 3) It would reduce roving patrols due to increased manpower demands and cost - thus INCREASING response times to areas other than the c/p.

But what's it help? Nothing.

It would do genuine harm while doing no measurable good.

So why even consider it?