Go Back   > > >
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 29, 17, 12:20 pm   #31
  
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post
I'm disturb when some people seem to have no desire to hold acts committed by TSA employees accountable for their actions.

I do not understand where any concept of immunity for government employees comes from and I for one don't think police or anyone else should be exempted from legal jeopardy for their actions. Break the law and suffer the consequences. Use your office to abuse the law suffer the consequences.

If I abused my position and did something illegal I would fully expect that my employer or violated person would take action. Why would they not? It should be no different for a TSA employee.

If TSA want its screeners to grope genitals or karate chop people in the crotch then put that in TSA's guidance to employees and publish those things for public consumption. By doing those things TSA would remove any claims of improper screening by the employee.



Unfortunately, TSA is too cowardly to properly describe the new pat down as they use the term "groin" or "groin area" when telling passengers what will happen instead of "I will be touching your genitals (your genital area)."

Then again, TSA also claims that genital contact really doesn't happen or if it does, it's "incidental".

Quote:
“contact with Plaintiff’s genitals, if any at all, was incidental and occurred through the course of a typical security pat-down.”
petaluma1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 4:40 pm   #32
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles
  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: VNY | BUR | LAX
Programs: AAdvantage | MileagePlus
Posts: 8,445
Exclamation Moderator's Note: Topic Drift

Folks,

The topic of this thread is: TSA should be responsible for all baggage losses

Please keep FlyerTalk Rule 5 (Stay On Topic) in mind when posting in this thread and confine your remarks as closely as possible to compensation for damage to and/or loss of luggage.

If you wish to argue about which terms the TSA should use to describe how its enhanced physical screening is carried out or its veracity as an organization, we have plenty of active threads dealing with those topics.

Thank you for your understanding and your anticipated cooperation in this matter.

TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator
TWA884 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 17, 6:20 pm   #33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 26,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by awayIgo View Post
I have had my baggage opened numerous times by TSA. The only way I know it's open, is the note left-- and occasional sloppy repacking. I find they are usually looking for something that showed on an X-ray. They pull it out and don't a.ways out it back. However, my TSA locks have always been opened with a key and always relocked.
After the early days that's been our experience, also. When they were just getting started they apparently decided the strapping on the bag was going to take too long, the bags weren't opened but the locks weren't replaced. Zero issues since then, though, and we've gotten pretty good at guessing what's going to trigger a search. We're often carrying odd items requested by her relatives, searches are common but by now we are nearly 100% at predicting what bag(s) will be opened and pack with that in mind.
Loren Pechtel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 17, 6:22 pm   #34
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 26,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
"Oh, darn, the CCTV cameras weren't working."

"Oh, darn, the screener's back is to the camera, so we can't see anything."

"Oh, darn, the CCTV tape footage got deleted ... you really should've told us about this earlier so we didn't delete it."

"Oh, darn, the CCTV tape footage is so grainy that we can't tell when the bag in question got searched"

There's plenty of ways for an individual screener to evade being identified. As you point out ... until the TSA parent organization takes the lead in assuming responsibility and liability, there will be a host of ways for individual screeners to avoid responsibility too.
I'd say it doesn't matter. If the cameras failed or were too poor to do a decent job then I would grant a presumption that the agent was dirty. If they have to start paying the claims those cameras will start working.
Loren Pechtel is offline   Reply With Quote
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Thread Tools
Search Thread
Go to Top
Forum Jump
Contact Us - FlyerTalk - Archive - Top