Originally Posted by
Lara21
Give TSA full authority in the checkpoint area and reduce confusion of security “ownership”.
I'm thinking that TSA really is trying to get the authority to do custom style searches along with the authority to detain passengers like they do at border crossings. Because there is no other reason for them wanting total authority and security ownership of the checkpoint areas other than to have complete control of the passengers so they can do the searches they want since Pistole is former FBI and we all know that during the current searches he is looking for more than just items that can bring down a plane.
Actually, I think there is another explanation ... which doesn't come across as nearly as sinister as some of the other theories suggested here.
We've heard any number of times in different threads here that TSA is "merely" a renter of its space in the airport --- and because of that status, it doesn't have full control of the screening process. Consider:
- TSA won't screen TSOs everytime they enter/leave the checkpoint area, and won't subject them to the same LGA restrictions as passengers, because in many cases their break areas are outside the sterile area, and since they're not in complete control, they can't require a break area for TSOs inside the sterile area.
- TSA can't install more physical space for passengers to disassemble themselves before the checkpoint, and reassemble themselves after the checkpoint, because they're not in complete control of how much, and what kind, of space they're given at the airport.
- During the inevitable discussions about whether or not there ought to be a separate line for first-class passengers feeding into the TDC position at the checkpoint, we're told that TSA's rental space begins at the TDC position, and since they're not in complete control, they can't control whether or not the airlines create separate lines for first-class passengers.
I think that TSA's desire for "complete control" might simply be a desire to have complete control over its physical space at the airports --- not merely the same (lack) control given to any other airport tenant.
Of course, the other theories promoted here could just as easily be true. I'm not saying whether or not my theory is more or less likely ... just pointing out an alternative theory that isn't quite as Orwellian.