Originally Posted by
gsoltso
TSA IS a preventative measure, you are safer getting on a plane with TSA there than you would be without them there. That is not undermining myself, it is simply a fact. With no screening, there would be a chance for anyone with anything to get on the plane.
Straw man, false dichotomy,
argumentum ad consequentiam.
Question: Is it safer getting on a plane with TSA than it was getting on a plane with the pre-TSA security? Answer: No.
Originally Posted by
gsoltso
In terms of the mechanics of the device, not in dispute.
Originally Posted by
gsoltso
I agree that the aim of the organization is a risk free enviornment, I also agree with you that it is impossible. I believe that means we should try to prevent what we can with all means at our disposal, that is just trying to do the best you can with what you have.
Argumentum ad consequentiam.
ALL means? How very Machiavellian. I submit to you, sir, that the ends do not always justify the means.
Originally Posted by
gsoltso
Probability is a bad reason to change a screening process. the probability of someone taking over a plane with a gun is an extremely low, but there is the chance that several people on the flight will be injured or killed if someone tries it - does that mean we should not screen for guns? The probability of someone taking over a plane with a box cutter or knife is nil, does that mean we should stop screening for them?
False dichotomy,
argumentum ad consequentiam.
Probability is the only reason to change the screening process, and you’re addressing probability in the wrong context. Question: given the range of devices accessible to be used to take over a plane, what is the probability that a given device will be effectively used?
Originally Posted by
gsoltso
All it takes is one person to try the shoe bomb apporach again and then the same people on here that have been raising hades about the shoe screening would be whining about how TSA stopped the "shoe carnival" (as you so affectionately call it) and it was all our fault. I reworded the argument to make the point that most of the arguments made here against the shoe screening process can be defended with the same thought process.
Tu quoque.
Do not presume my motivation or determination. Your assertion presumes that I (and others) lack the principles to stand by our beliefs. You are wrong, sir. Period.
Originally Posted by
gsoltso
I think that the agency has taken legal issue to heart and consult before making changes.
I’ve seen no evidence of any such thing. To the contrary, I’ve seen at least two posts within the last seven days detailing continued recent, egregious, inappropriate and illegal extensions of power by TSA operatives.
Originally Posted by
gsoltso
Do they get it wrong sometimes? Yup, they would be computers if they didnt, but they are human, so mistakes will be made from time to time. If there are legal questions for the procedures, they will be worked out in the courts system, that is what it is there for.
It is unfortunate and dismaying that an agency of the United States government in unable to remain within the bound of law and regulation absent intervention by the courts.
Originally Posted by
gsoltso
As for the lack of training or competence, I challenge your assumption, this is the best trained workforce in the federal government, we recertify, train constantly and learn new stuff almost every week.
Quantity of training does not imply
quality of training. Neither quantity of training
nor quality of training implies competence. It’s bad enough to have an entire federal agency apparently run by the Peter Principle. It’s worse that the Peter Principle apparently extends to the hiring level in so very many cases.
Originally Posted by
gsoltso
The fact that 99% of the publicity you see is negative must have influenced your assumption, because for every bad thing I see on the news, I see a thousand good things done by my coworkers (both here and nationally).
STOP making baseless assumptions. Publicity, good or bad, does not influence my thinking. Neither do your anecdotal experiences. I acknowledge the fact that some TSA operatives are above the baseline. I draw conclusions based upon what I personally experience. I can believe TSA’s propaganda, or I can believe my own lying eyes. Guess which way I tend to lean.