Old Oct 2, 06, 1:03 pm
  #1526  
MKEbound
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: BDL
Programs: NWA Platinum, HHonors Diamond, SPG, YX, AA
Posts: 5,351
Originally Posted by 2smrt4u
MKEBound... I get why you did what you did. If you could answer for me just what exact TSA rules you think are idiotic? If you were given the power to make the rules for travel what would you keep, get rid of, add and why? Then I must also ask how you would handle the situation if one of your rules caused a situation like your experience? I'm not being sarcastic at all, my only point is that attacking the person wasn't the best possible case for you to create your argument. People tend to disagree with things like this because all too often a bold statement like yours is made with nothing to back the direct claim that he was/is an idiot. His rules may annoy us but why attack his intelligence? I would venture to guess that there are a whole lot of people involved in the decision making process when such rules are developed. This is your argument, tell us how you'd make the rules better for everyone.
You asked, so I took the time to answer. Please read with an open mind, but in the end if you disagree, that's okay. These are just my humble opinions.

"I get why you did what you did. If you could answer for me just what exact TSA rules you think are idiotic? If you were given the power to make the rules for travel what would you keep, get rid of, add and why?"

Eliminate printing SSSS on a boarding pass. How stupid can they be? Everyone knows what it means. If they are going to do random secondary screenings, they need to be unexpected. (see point 2)

Eliminate random secondary screenings. Once a person has cleared the X-ray and WTMD they should be free to go. I have no problem with the TSA taking time to resolve why an alarm sounded, but harassing people for no reason other than wanting to board a plane should stop.

Eliminate the ID check. Thousands of ID are acceptable to use and many are easy to fake. A matching fake boarding pass would be even easier considering that OLCI (on-line check in) + photo shop could create a fake boarding pass in seconds. In the end checking ID only protects the airline from people from flying on another person's ticket, and for the TSA to do it using tax payer money is a waste of my tax dollars.

Eliminate pat downs except as a last resort (when an alarm from the WTMD and then the handheld cannot be resolved). Once that last resort is reached, only a LEO should be allowed to do a pat down. There is no reason people should be treated in such an undignified way, much less be groped by poorly trained TSA screeners.

Eliminate mandatory removal of shoes unless the WTMD alarms due to metal in the shoe. Another TSA window dressing that treats people in an undignified manner without improving security.

Eliminate the lighter ban (in fairness Congress passed this law, not the TSA) I don't smoke, but tell me why can I carry 4 books of matches (not 5, that's illegal too) but I can't carry a lighter? How does this improve security? Oh, wait since my screeners are worried about finding lighters it only serves as a distraction to finding real weapons.

Eliminate at-the-gate-screening. If they don't think screening at the checkpoint is good enough, why not figure out the way to do it right rather than wasting peoples time and money with a second check at the gate.

Eliminate the water ban. Water is harmless, there is no reason why I shouldn't be able to carry it though the checkpoint. Please realize that every expert and chemist interviewed since 8/10 has pointed out how unrealistic the idea of a liquid bomb plot is. A couple of bad guys were sitting around dreaming of ways to attack aircraft and someone suggested liquid explosives. They never built a bomb, never bought a ticket, yet in typical knee-jerk reaction style millions of people around the world have been harassed and had their property seized. The terrorists won that round without ever doing anything!

Building on the statement above, eliminate the new "3oz of toothpaste is okay, but 4oz is not" foolishness. If toothpaste is okay, then it's okay. If toothpaste can be used to blow up a plane than it's not. Just in case anyone isn't sure, let me assure you toothpaste is not a threat. This new rule is being spun as a "compromise between security and convince." Anyone who has common sense will call bull on such a statement, it's TSA window dressing at best.

Eliminate the requirement to leave your bag unlocked. Only a foolish person allows so many other people to access to their belongings with out taking steps to secure it. People are being robbed daily by TSA personal, baggage handlers and whoever else has the chance to peek into your luggage. If the TSA needs to do a hand search of your checked baggage, it should only be done if the owner is present, and thus allows the owner to lock their bag when they are done.

Start screening cargo that is loaded in the belly of passenger planes. If I could make this 100 ft tall and flashing I would! You or I could drive to the airport right now and visit the cargo office of the airline of our choice, hire them to carry a package and it will be loaded into the cargo hold of the next plane to fly to the destination of your choice. Much of this type of cargo is never screened. So you build a bomb, rig a detonator that is triggered once the plane reaches 20k feet and you blow up a plane without ever even visiting the checkpoint.

Start spending money on better x-rays or devices that do a better job of detecting explosives in carry-on luggage.


In the grand scheme of things I would put myself, as head of the TSA, out of a job because I would want to eliminate the TSA and hand back the responsibility of screening PAX back to the airlines. It is in the airlines best interest to provide real security with good customer service. A concept that the TSA has not embraced after 5 years.

Then I must also ask how you would handle the situation if one of your rules caused a situation like your experience? I'm not being sarcastic at all, my only point is that attacking the person wasn't the best possible case for you to create your argument. People tend to disagree with things like this because all too often a bold statement like yours is made with nothing to back the direct claim that he was/is an idiot. His rules may annoy us but why attack his intelligence?

If I was a TSA employee - or anyone's employee - and someone attacked the intelligence of my boss I might ignore it (if I was busy) or ask why they thought he's an idiot. Once again if I had time, and I disagreed, I might talk further or not. I can assure you I would never tell anyone that they have "no right" to say such a thing. As to why attach his intelligence? The fact of the matter is I only had a small space to write, and if I could have written all what I wrote above I would have.

In the end Kip Hawley might not be an Idiot, and it may have been in poor taste to call him a such. But I do think his policies are idiotic.

Last edited by MKEbound; Oct 2, 06 at 3:15 pm Reason: Add info on shoe removal
MKEbound is offline