FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - testing eye drops
View Single Post
Old Jul 11, 2012, 6:41 am
  #66  
GaryD
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: LGA, JFK
Posts: 1,018
Originally Posted by TSORon
Actually, that’s a fairly accurate statement. We are not chemists, therefore they make the systems we use pretty simple to operate. I am not a computer engineer either, but that does not prevent me from using one.



Not needed, but thanks for the offer. What is needed is a bit of perspective. We screen just about 2,000,000 passengers each and every day. The system in place is specifically designed to meet that work load and be able to expand if needed. We cannot waste our time on the trivialities that each passenger brings to the checkpoint with them, they have places to go and we a job to do. The rules are pretty clear, but every single minute of every single day people break them. Is the American public truly that stupid? I honestly don’t think so, at least until the next passenger brings his firearm to the checkpoint. At that point I have to wonder.

No security system is 100% perfect. That’s a fact. The government is required to provide for the common good and protect its citizens, its in the constitution. On 9/11/2001 the USA was attacked by … well we all know that story. The government’s response to the threat was to federalize the screening workforce and the system that failed so miserably.

Since 2002 there has not been a successful attack on an airline from a US airport. Attacks there have been, but not from one of the airports secured by the TSA or one of its civilian contract organizations. Is this all because of the TSA? No. It’s because of the US government. Agencies who work with the TSA, for the TSA, and who provide every other kind of support to TSA’s activities. It is also in part to the changes in screening methodology, removing the airlines from the business of screening passengers and letting them put their resources to better use. It is also in part due to the passengers themselves, passengers who will no longer sit idle while someone threatens their aircraft and their lives. People who will take an active part in notifying the authorities of suspicious activities by one of their fellow passengers, people who keep their eyes open and their ears sharp.

In other words its many things. Many people. Much effort. And yes, expanded funding for the required changes. The folks here who complain the loudest are also the type that screamed the loudest for the changes needed, likely the very same people in fact. They will never admit it, but it’s true none the less.

Yet even with all of that, there is still no perfect system. None. There are holes. There are personnel failures, criminal activity, and thoughtlessness. Just because the folks here cannot (or refuse to) understand purposes for the procedures we have, does not mean that they are wrong or meaningless. It just means that they are choosing ignorance over knowledge.
Why haven't you answered BubbaLoop's perfectly reasonable question (asked after he provided his impressive credentials at your request), raised on this very thread on July 9, at 7:02 a.m., see http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/18894842-post54.html:

Since I seem to miss "quite a bit" of your information, could you please point me exactly to the part in which a test strip (not an electronic "sniffer" like the one you showed here, which, by the way, also does not detect peroxides) waved above a solution is capable of detecting peroxides.
For your original claim, about peroxides and testing strips, see your post here on June 29, at 1:39 p.m.:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/18843282-post27.html

I have used the strips and can say as a professional that they work just fine. Peroxides are the easiest to detect, some others not so much.
So?

Last edited by GaryD; Jul 11, 2012 at 7:07 am Reason: provide further context for question
GaryD is offline