Originally Posted by clrankin
I've been subjected to secondary searches that were done by women, and I'm a guy. It's not supposed to be done, but it happens every now and then nonetheless. Perhaps that's something that I should start filing complaints about if it ever happens to me again.
To be honest, out of the times I've flown I can only think of once or twice that I've been secondary screened by a woman. But that still doesn't mean it doesn't happen or isn't a problem when it does.
That is what I said. It is not supposed to happen. I didnt categorically deny that it does.
OK, so how many women have been caught with TATP in their bras? I'm not trying to be cute; this is really a matter of curiousity for me. If the TSA is going to use the old security ruse to pat down privates, then the flying public has the right-- and duty-- to demand adequate justification.
Out of the women that have been caught with TATP in their bras, how many of them were arrested, jailed, tried, and convicted of terrorist activities? How many of them had adequate reasons (like job-related or something) for having TATP there? From the numbers I'm imagining I'm likely to see in responses to these questions, I would guess that checking people's private parts is likely a waste of time.
No one will ever know. The theory that I discribed in an earlier post about displacing the activity holds true here. If TSA is looking for it, it would not likely occur due to the fact that very few people are dumb enough to try it. On the other hand if we are not looking, it would probably occur....Its an enigma!
That's great. Does this include all folks working with baggage in every area, all folks working at concessions behind the security checkpoints, and anybody else that might come into contact with the "sterile" area as well? Is it done every time they come in and out of every checkpoint at every airport? If so, that's one GIGANTIC hole that the TSA has closed. I'm glad to see that they have done something with this-- I always thought that letting anyone who deals with working on planes, refueling planes, working on baggage, working in or around the sterile area, or flying anywhere not get beyond the checkpoint without being inspected was a good idea. If all passengers have to do it, then everyone else should too.
Yes it now applies to all airport employees that enter the sterile area. There are even some airlines that have security rescreen all the workers when they go to get on the plane for things like food service and cleaning.
No, I don't. Are you implying that there is some "acceptable" number of complaints from passengers for the TSA? As far as I'm concerned, the only acceptable number of complaints for the TSA should be "0".
There are many reasons why there could be this small of a number of complaints; many of them are totally unrelated to the TSA's quality of service:
- Many people may be unwilling to take the time to file a complaint
- Many people may feel that being fondled and harassed about taking off shoes actually increases their safety, so are willing to put up with the procedure
- Some complaints may just be thrown away by the TSA in an attempt to hide how bad the agency and its screeners actually are
- Some screeners may lead people to believe that fondling breasts is a legally sanctioned activity, as long as it's done at an airport security checkpoint
- Many people may not like what the TSA does, but are not upset enough by it to be moved to action (we're generally a society of whiners that don't do much to change things... compare the number of people that actually vote with the number of people that complain about elected officials as an example)
This is only a few reasons that I can think of off the top of my head.
Now, I am willing to concede that the lack of complaints could be due to some TSA checkpoints being friendly, effective, and efficient. Part of the reason I often fly from IAD instead of DCA or BWI is because most of the TSA folks there are friendly and efficient. A lot of times at least one of them will say "hello" or "good morning" to me, or at least give me a smile, before I'm on my way. (The other reason I fly from IAD is because it's only 20 minutes away from where I live.)
It is unfortunate that not all TSA checkpoints are like the ones I usually go through at IAD. The checkpoint at MLI is a perfect example-- the people I've dealt with there are know-it-all jerks who like to make up policies as they go along. They have directed profanity toward me before and have subjected me to unnecessary secondary searches while calling me an *ssh*l* to my face. Extremely rude and unprofessional. And it's not just the front line folks-- one person identifying himself as a manager acted this way toward me too. This is a good part of the reason why I try to fly into other places when visiting the Quad Cities area. Cedar Rapids is sometimes a decent alternative; on one other occasion I've just flown into ORD and driven the 3 hours down from Chicago.
How unfortunate for you. In any type of accounting scenario there is likely to be an acceptable amount of complaints. There are some people that are never going to be totally happy no matter what we do or how we do it. This number has to be compensated for. It will be interesting to see how high the complaints have risen to since we started the pat downs.
If the truth be told, there will be nothing that the TSA could ever do to get me to not mind secondary searches in any way. However, there are things that they could do to make such searches more tolerable (I'm likely to get them, as I no longer remove shoes when going through the checkpoint). Here's a start to my list:
- Tell me WHY the secondary search is necessary. Tell me what part of my clothing, person, shoes, jacket, or carry-on triggered the problem. Tell me exactly what the problem is. And don't give me any of this "it's a secret" crap-- there should be no secret rules, secret profiles, or secret anything at the checkpoint, period.
- Tell me WHAT you plan to do BEFORE doing it. If you need to search my laptop, fine... Tell me what you are doing before you take the laptop away. If you need to check my shoes, fine. Tell me what you will do with them before taking them from me. This stuff is mine (or is stuff I'm responsible for), and I have a right to know what you're doing and what you're looking for. To the TSA's credit, they have done (mostly) a good job here. Procedures have been explained to my satisfaction when I've asked questions for additional details at times.
- Keep ALL of my stuff COMPLETELY visible to me AT ALL TIMES. I've said it before, and will say it again... TSA agents cannot be trusted with nice stuff. I have a right (and responsibilty) to protect my belongings, and the TSA has no right to interfere with me protecting them. To the TSA's credit, I will say that my experience here has been rather good. When my laptop bag needs to be searched further, I have told them to wait until the wand raping has concluded and keep all items in my sight at all times-- they have complied when told to do so.
- ALWAYS be COURTEOUS and KIND and RESPECTFUL. People that treat me in those ways get treated in like manner. Those who don't also find themselves treated in a like manner. I don't expect people to kiss my butt, but I do expect a certain level of decorum. I expect to be called "sir" (or alternatively "Mr. clrankin", if they see my name on the ticket). I'd like to see a nice smile and have someone wish me a good flight or a good day. Simple things like this would go a long way to help with the TSA's reputation. It would certainly cut down on some of the complaints I've filed in the past.
- Do NOT inspect people's private parts. This is just disgusting and degrading. I doubt that any terrorist has ever been caught smuggling explosives in her bra, and I doubt that any ever will. There is no need for this. Fondling women's breasts in the name of airline security sits just as well with me as if someone were to grab my genitalia and "feel around" for something. Neither is necessary, and the public should not accept either as standard procedure.
The above doesn't constitute a complete list, but I'd consider it to be a good start.
I agree with you 100% That is the way that it was intended to be. Unfortunately though the pathway to hell is paved with good intentions. As long as people rely on people to do things, there will always be dissatisfaction in one form or another. Customer service and security is a hard pair of practices to put together. When people get disgusted with other people then the whole scenario takes on a different light. I have seen other posters in this forum say that TSA has to deal with some people that are not nice. You deal with people like that often and you tend to get cynical,snide and unpleasant yourself. It is a fault of human nature. Unfortunately I cannot agree with your catagorical assessment that TSA agents cannot be trusted with nice stuff. That would be equal to me saying that frequent fliers are bad news. Some are, some arent. Some can be and some cannot be. Its the human factor again and people predisposed to certain feelings based on past events. All in all though your post was well thought and refreshing.