Originally Posted by
Global_Hi_Flyer
You conveniently left narcotics off the list.
I didn’t make a list.
Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
Saved in case the original post was deleted.
Why? Was it that interesting a post?
Originally Posted by
CalVol
Well, I think it is a big deal when I had to waste an extra 20 minutes of my time getting the extra attention...(this after being made to wait about the same for the original grope)...and I really think it is a big deal when the TSO put his hand on my pennies!
Good for you.
Originally Posted by
fishferbrains
I can't believe the TSA machine wouldn't like a few "wins" under it's belt related to the scanners/puffers/etc. I don't think they've been any, can you recall one?
Yes.
Originally Posted by
fishferbrains
As for proven "technology", they're called D-O-G-S. As they are a highly mobile and effective deterrent and screening force; why would we invest otherwise?
Dogs are 70% effective when they are working. And they have serious limitations as to when they “can” work, under what conditions, and are far more expensive than you might suspect not only to use but to train, maintain, and procure. Dogs have their place in the system, but are not the “be-all and end-all” of explosives detection.