<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Bart:
Great responses from everyone and thank you for welcoming me to FT. Just to clarify a couple things:
The underwear remark was an attempt at humor; poking fun at the government bureaucracy; "if you think the TSA shoe policy is ridiculous, imagine IF...."
MANY shoes DO have steel shanks. This is true (I see them when they pass through the X-ray). And it's also true that running shoes, flip flops and a small number of dress shoes do not have steel shanks. HOWEVER, a lot of shoes do NOT necessarily have enough metal in the shanks to set off the walk-through metal detector by themselves. The issue then becomes a matter of OTHER metal objects you may have on you which increase the likelihood of setting off the alarm. The suggestion to remove the shoes is made because it is usually easier to remove them than to take additional time removing belts, watches, jewelry, buttons, pins, tie tacks, etc. However, in the end, YOU the passenger have the choice to remove or not remove anything before entering the checkpoint. I make it a point to explain this to the people who process through my airport and there are a number of them who prefer secondary screening over trying to guess what else may have set off the alarm. What I don't do is harrass passengers. At my airport, we do not give the "shoes off or else" speech, and our supervisors and leads enforce this non-harrassment of passengers.
As for the general comment about the shoes, the walk-through metal detector is designed to detect metal. Period. It is the TSA screener's responsibility to determine the reason why someone alarms at the mag. The metal shank has characteristics consistent with the blade of a knife which explains why the metal detectors are as sensitive as they are. I understand the frustration that comes from 80% of the alarms resulting from shoes (the other causes for alarms are medical implants, body braces, cell phones, large amounts of change, etc). However, OTHER items we have found resulting from these alarms at my airport have been knives inside of coat pockets, live ammunition inside pants pockets, credit card knives inside wallets and a pair of scissors inside a pants pocket that was wrapped inside a paper towel. ...and unfortunately some have even tried to distract the screener by claiming to be a member of the Platinum Club, or that they fly out every week and because we should know them by now, we shouldn't subject them to this treatment, etc. Once the item is found and the matter is turned over to law enforcement authorities (deliberately trying to conceal an item, even a pair of scissors, IS a crime),
Once again, thanks for the welcome. Appreciate all the responses and look forward to meaningful discussions.</font>
Bart, You have started your FT life with some very diplomatic posts and I appreciate it. Reading the TSA postings (pro and con) one can see that the FF'ers here don't want No Security we want real security. Your joke about the underwear isn't really a joke as it is more possible/probable than shoes at this point in the game.
The airports that I frequent (except ORD) just recommend you remove your shoes/flip flops. There is more often than not no "or else" said or even implied, however by observing passengers it is obvious that if you do not, and pass through the metal detector and do not alarm, you are still directed to secondary to sit and remove your shoes/flip flops while they x-ray them. While I have not experienced a "2nd chance" airport, I look forward to it.
The oh so dangerous items you listed aren't credible threats (perhaps the ammunition, but it's a stretch). I realize they are on the "list". I wonder, just because a pair of scissors is wrapped in a towel how is this an attempt to conceal unless the "offender" confessed. How can any prohibited metallic item be concealed when one places it through the x-ray. Maybe they didn't want it poking a hole in something. I'd be more concerned with the glass wine bottle on board the aircraft being used as a weapon than scissors.
"Mr. Platinum" should be able to have a one time background check and then unlimited/unscreened access to airplanes just like every single unscreened ground person that accesses airplanes. Pretty ridiculous don't you think?
What's your position on checked luggage? For or against the leave it unlocked "or else" we aren't responsible for destroying it to "inspect" rule? Do you think this is a resonable request, to leave your checked luggage unlocked? Considering that all cargo on passenger planes is not screened but rather randomly screened it seems ridiculous to destroy someones luggage because of the need to inspect, while potential threats can easily slip through in cargo.
Tuner, I assumed you were including me in your triplets comment. Again, without de-shoeing and using my toes, I still count more than 3.