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

Gate searches -- still?!? AAARRRHHHGGG!! (merged)

Gate searches -- still?!? AAARRRHHHGGG!! (merged)

Old Mar 14, 2009, 11:46 pm
  #151  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA
Programs: AAdvantage, MileagePlus, SkyMiles
Posts: 4,153
I experienced the opposite of everyone here today...interesting. DCA-CVG-SFO via DL, nothing at all. Didn't see any TSA employees in the secure areas at all three airports. Strange. Security was also quick and efficient at DCA, despite the crowd.
MrAndy1369 is online now  
Old Mar 15, 2009, 2:02 pm
  #152  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by enigmamatt
The absurdity is continuing at BWI. Today they're pushing around a little cart with a sign on it that says everyone is subject to additional screening prior to boarding the aircraft. They were basically standing in front of the screens figuring out which gate to go attack. Looks like they'll be hitting my flight from BWI-ATL here in a few minutes.

This is absurd.
I think there is an upside to the TSA Gate Screenings.

It proves without question that TSA Screening at checkpoints is worthless. If not so then no reason would exist to gate screen.

Even those who fly for the very first time and witness this will understand that TSA is doing something but that something is not about providing security.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Mar 15, 2009, 9:29 pm
  #153  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas
Programs: AA PLT/5MM; AS MVP GLD 75K; DL DM; EK SLV; HHonors DIAM; Marriott GLD
Posts: 4,089
I hit the first one I've seen in awhile last week going from Santo Domingo to Miami. Having grown complacent since they got rid of them awhile back, I had stopped doing the usual standard avoidance trick for those boarding first. As a result, I got stopped in the jetbridge and spent 10 minutes going through a pretty useless secondary screening procedure.
HKG_Flyer1 is offline  
Old Mar 16, 2009, 2:30 am
  #154  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Apparently the TSA hates the IAD moon-buggy transports enough to spare me witnessing this TSA garbage there.

It's just too bad IAD airport is such an awful place for international arrivals and international-domestic transfers or this (relative lack of gate searches at IAD) could have helped IAD gain a bit of a leg up from it's status as the WAS-area airport best avoided by me.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Mar 16, 2009, 6:22 am
  #155  
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,946
Originally Posted by GUWonder
Apparently the TSA hates the IAD moon-buggy transports enough to spare me witnessing this TSA garbage there.

It's just too bad IAD airport is such an awful place for international arrivals and international-domestic transfers or this (relative lack of gate searches at IAD) could have helped IAD gain a bit of a leg up from it's status as the WAS-area airport best avoided by me.
That and no Metro stop.
Spiff is online now  
Old Mar 16, 2009, 8:14 am
  #156  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 315
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
I think there is an upside to the TSA Gate Screenings.

It proves without question that TSA Screening at checkpoints is worthless. If not so then no reason would exist to gate screen.

Even those who fly for the very first time and witness this will understand that TSA is doing something but that something is not about providing security.
That's why it's called LAYERED SECURITY. Even if the TSA was batting 90% on screening (which they're not even close...last I recall it was about 50% on detection during testing), there would still exist the need to conduct gate screenings. There is no such thing as perfection in security or just about anything else in life, friend.

Have a nice day,

TB
TerminalBliss is offline  
Old Mar 16, 2009, 9:05 am
  #157  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by TerminalBliss
That's why it's called LAYERED SECURITY. Even if the TSA was batting 90% on screening (which they're not even close...last I recall it was about 50% on detection during testing), there would still exist the need to conduct gate screenings. There is no such thing as perfection in security or just about anything else in life, friend.

Have a nice day,

TB
Any operational manager -- in and out of government -- worth their weight in water ought to know that if a process's big quality failure is upstream, then that is what needs fixing. Applying a (more faulty) type of attempted quality control assurance check downstream is a waste of resources.

The line of reasoning you supplied above comes across to me as a poor excuse -- and even calling it that is putting it kindly -- for that which is indefensible. That line of reasoning could just as "well" be applied to try to excuse an endless amount of quality (lack of) control checks that strip away resources from the initial checkpoint. Do you want me to numerically demonstrate how instituting this kind of (pseudo-)quality control assurance measure is a failure?

Do you really believe the downstream attempt at supposed quality control assurance is even more robust than the initial screening checkpoint? Is the false negative rate higher at the gate checks or at the WTMD+x-ray checkpoint? Answer those questions and perhaps you can demonstrate to yourself why this measure has no logical defense in a world of limited resources.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Mar 16, 2009, 10:38 am
  #158  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Originally Posted by TerminalBliss
That's why it's called LAYERED SECURITY. Even if the TSA was batting 90% on screening (which they're not even close...last I recall it was about 50% on detection during testing), there would still exist the need to conduct gate screenings. There is no such thing as perfection in security or just about anything else in life, friend.

Have a nice day,

TB
So we agree that TSA screening at the primary checkpoints is somewhat less that 100% successful. This is where 100% of passengers are screened, right?

So now we move additional screening to the gate where only a small percentage of those who cleared primary screening will get screened again. Probably less than 1% of those already screened will be re screened but without the benefit of some of the advance equipment available at primary checkpoints.

Does this really improve anything? I suggest very little improvement if any, just more hassle for travelers.

Why not do the reasonable thing and fix the issues at primary screening points? Would this not result in the highest return on effort?

I say again, gate screening demonstrates soundly the poor quality of TSA's overall screening program.

It's just another Act in TSA Theater!
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Mar 16, 2009, 3:43 pm
  #159  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 861
Originally Posted by TerminalBliss
That's why it's called LAYERED SECURITY. Even if the TSA was batting 90% on screening (which they're not even close...last I recall it was about 50% on detection during testing), there would still exist the need to conduct gate screenings. There is no such thing as perfection in security or just about anything else in life, friend.

Have a nice day,

TB
That doesn't make any sense.

If you are a farmer with a 100 acre field and you know your irrigation system is failing to deliver water to a large percentage of the plants, do you:

A. Enter the field with a watering can and sprinkle water around randomly; or
B. Find out what is wrong with the irrigation system and fix it.

Gate screenings is like entering the field with one watering can and sprinkling at random. It's a waste of resources that won't address the problem.
docmonkey is offline  
Old Mar 17, 2009, 10:27 pm
  #160  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Programs: CO PE, DL PM
Posts: 370
Gate Search Today 4/17, at SNA, Continental flight 420. They skipped over the first class passengers, so I didn't see who got 'selected'.
najay is offline  
Old Mar 17, 2009, 10:31 pm
  #161  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Programs: Marriott Plat
Posts: 943
Had it at DCA on Sunday night, CO 1220 to EWR. They only ended up screening 2 people AFAIK.
amejr999 is offline  
Old Mar 18, 2009, 4:18 am
  #162  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 126
More Gate Searches in Store for Fliers

In today's USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/fligh...terstitialskip
fbrown627 is offline  
Old Mar 18, 2009, 4:49 am
  #163  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,153
Wow -- two man-on-the-street quotes and both were highly negative. Every one of the written comments except one were anywhere from negative to angry. Combined with Rep. DeFazio's experience the other night, perhaps the TSA will finally be told "no."

Countdown to Propaganda Village post: "10, 9, 8, ...""
FliesWay2Much is offline  
Old Mar 18, 2009, 5:13 am
  #164  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
The motive for the program, theorizes aviation security consultant Rich Roth, is that the TSA fears that airport workers, who are not routinely screened, could sneak weapons into the secure area of an airport and give them to passengers.
So rather than screen all airport workers thoroughly, including TSA, the passenger once again is the scapegoat. Way to go, TSA!
doober is offline  
Old Mar 18, 2009, 8:59 am
  #165  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10,037
Originally Posted by doober
So rather than screen all airport workers thoroughly, including TSA, the passenger once again is the scapegoat. Way to go, TSA!
To me, that comment reads as a backward jab at the TSA's policy to not screen airport employees.


This also reads to me that the TSA is bloated with staff. No more SSSS, so they need to find something for that extra staff to do. Time for some TSA attrition. Congress....are you listening?
LessO2 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.