Originally Posted by Bart
I think it's erroneous to assume that behavior-based screening should be limited to potential terrorists. There are others such as the so-called "air rage" passenger.
If we're talking the obviously intoxicated, the airlines can police that themselves. Otherwise we're getting into TSA mission-creep (enlargement) mode.
Originally Posted by Bart
Point is that some people are just nervous by the whole screening experience, and it's not an indication of any criminal intent. I've had people apologize profusely for having a pair of scissors as if they were just caught stealing from the bank vault red-handed. And I've had to calm them down, explain that they didn't violate any laws and that the prohibition on scissors (at that time) was an administrative restriction. There are many different causes behind behaviors, and cultural upbringing is certainly a key factor that needs to be considered for why someone behaves a certain way or does NOT behave a certain way.
I still maintain that there's a "gut instinct" that is inherent in all of us. However, due to our own cultural upbringing, we dismiss these instincts or rationalize them away. Human interaction is far more than verbal communication. Body language is a key part of communication. In fact, 80% of communication is non-verbal, yet many of us dismiss it so quickly and rely on the 20% that is verbal.
As an intelligence officer, I had to be sensitive to the whole package. I've seen some intelligence officers take a scientific approach to the business and fail miserably. They were too mechanical and they failed to take cultural differences into account. There were others who had this knack of picking up on the subtleties of non-verbals and were quite successful.
To some, a lot of this is voodoo BS. It was referred to as the "giggle factor" by the conventional thinkers in the "business." That's mostly because they were too enamored with gadgets and computers that spit out statistical data and recorded conversations. My line of work was more into the nuances of a hand movement, eye movement, posture, and other behaviors which spell the difference between a successful operation and a polticial disaster.
I think you and I agree that it's a bad idea for TSA to attempt to formalize any attempts to assess human behaviors at the checkpoint. It's simply too complex. However, I think we may agree that if a screener "senses" that something is out of place and this "gut feeling" prompts the screener to be a little more attentive rather than attempt to rationalize it away, then this may result in more effective screening. But this is an individual characteristic. You can't package it and sell it wholesale.
Some people have this awareness, some people don't.
Screening to hire such people fails routinely too. After all, someone "can't package it and sell it wholesale" for others to buy it with any systematic assurances. Furthermore, it's rather common knowledge -- at least in some circles -- that women and babies are far better at picking up non-verbal cues. So does that mean more "'chicks' in uniform"?
And "child labor" too?
