|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13097847)
I actually beg to differ about the intelligence factor, some of the smartest people I have worked with are here at TSA (both locally and the blog team).
|
Originally Posted by knotyeagle
(Post 13097882)
Sounds good, which means of course that the screener was immediately corrected by the supervisor before it got out of hand, didn't it? I mean the container is opened, negotiable units (currency and checks) which could perhaps threaten the Obama stimulus package but not the flight to DCA were discovered. I'm curious why your brethren TSA screener elected to detain the passenger.
And how much of threat is a house phone number that it needs to be divulged? Your brethren lead screener Dominic Grieto at Austin (AUS) was insistent last October 18th that he could not "release me" until I told him my house phone number for an incident report that he wanted to write? He was wrong and I enjoyed him trying. We do not have detention capabilities (with the odd exception for safety issues - such as preventing you from going somewhere because something may cause you harm, or if there is a serious threat to the checkpoint area forcing the crowd to evacuate - although those are not detention technically), we only screen and secure. I don't know what the incident report was for, but if there was a problem with getting the needed info, then the LTSO should have contacted an STSO and let them make a determination if this is something that is important enough to require LEO intervention or just send you on your way with the information they already had. |
Originally Posted by red456
(Post 13097893)
:rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13097981)
Based upon procedure, what you describe is what should happen with a container that has organic that turns out to be nothing but money and a TSO is doing something they should not be doing (refusing to clear the item). I have no clue (again, I am not informed on but one side of the situation) what prompted the questioning and everything that went on after the item was cleared for WEI.
We do not have detention capabilities (with the odd exception for safety issues - such as preventing you from going somewhere because something may cause you harm, or if there is a serious threat to the checkpoint area forcing the crowd to evacuate - although those are not detention technically), we only screen and secure. I don't know what the incident report was for, but if there was a problem with getting the needed info, then the LTSO should have contacted an STSO and let them make a determination if this is something that is important enough to require LEO intervention or just send you on your way with the information they already had. And by the way, even in Texas a person is not required to show a driver's license unless operating a motor vehicle on a public highway. I'm sort of sorry Dominic Grieto did not try to get the AUS airport police involved. |
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13097847)
I will not presume to speak for fellow screeners without their direct input. I actually beg to differ about the intelligence factor, some of the smartest people I have worked with are here at TSA (both locally and the blog team). If there is confusion on what the TSOs are supposed to be looking for, then it is the responsibility of management to clarify and retrain where necessary. I hope that if any of you experience something that is blatantly wrong, you would forward the information to the proper TSA components (local airport staff, GotFeedback, and if it is egregious enough your local political structure). TSA can't fix what it doesn't know is wrong, so forward this type of info for us. I know some of you here have had bad experiences with TSOs, specific airports, and policies and even some with the GotFeedback programs as well. I know that, but I still say to keep forwarding the info, it is the only way for things to get to HQ and management so they can work on things that they are unaware of.
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 13098160)
If TSO's are so darn smart then why can't they learn that a Nexus card is acceptable ID?
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 13098160)
If TSO's are so darn smart then why can't they learn that a Nexus card is acceptable ID?
|
Originally Posted by knotyeagle
(Post 13098287)
Or a US Passport card, or a current US passport with an expired Venezuelan visa in it?
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13098557)
Both of those are acceptable forms of ID as long as they are current and not tampered with. The Venezuelan visa has no bearing one way or the other for transit in the US, only in Venezuela (sp?).
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13093701)
The search is for the specific threat items, period. There is no search for drugs, cash or anything specific that is not on the prohib list. When the bag is screened, we are searching for prohibs ONLY. When something is noticed on the Xray as a possible threat item, it is further screened with a bag check.
TSO Ron seems to think that if you see something in someone's bag that looks like illegal drugs, you are required to report it to a supervisor. In fact, as I learned last year, TSA's Operational Directive 300-54-2 states: When TSA discovers contraband during the screening process that is not a TSA Prohibited Item, the matter should be referred to the local Law Enforcement Officers as appropriate. An Enforcement Investigative Report should not be initiated. Examples of such contraband include:
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13093701)
There is no bag check for drugs or money. They are not something that is a specific "look for it" item.
|
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13098557)
Both of those are acceptable forms of ID as long as they are current and not tampered with. The Venezuelan visa has no bearing one way or the other for transit in the US, only in Venezuela (sp?).
A bit too much for the trained document checkers on what the "rule-du-jour" is or do they just make it up as they go along? |
Originally Posted by pmocek
(Post 13098735)
So if while searching someone's belongings with your X-ray machine, you see something that looks like a bag of plant matter and some rolling papers, a bag of powder along with a scale, razor blade, and a straw, a bag of powder with a syringe and a tourniquet, a big bag of pills, a bong, a fancy glass pipe, a large quantity of cash, a bunch of credit cards, or a bunch of passports, you're going to ignore that thing and move on? I find that hard to believe.
Of course I am not going to pass that up, there is a razor blade in it and razor blades are verboten. The other items (depending on what they look like, some of the stuff you list here would be dense enough to cause a bag check based on a possible threat) would possibly be discovered while looking for the razor blade. IF there is nothing in the bag that looks like a threat or possible threat, then the bag rolls on. Sorry if you don't believe me, but I really don't care. I tell you what I have done in the past and would do now on xray, whether you believe or not is not my problem. TSO Ron seems to think that if you see something in someone's bag that looks like illegal drugs, you are required to report it to a supervisor. In fact, as I learned last year, TSA's Operational Directive 300-54-2 states: I can't speak for Ron, he does a good enough job of that on his own. [/INDENT] West, this is so simple: 1) When you and your associates are searching someone's belongings, and you see something that looks to you like illegal drugs, what do you do? 2) When you and your associates are searching someone's belongings, and you see something that looks to you like a weapon, what do you do? Ron tells us that the next step in each case is the same: get a supervisor involved. Is that correct? If so, how can you say that you are searching for weapons but not for drugs? What you keep trying to make out is that all TSOs go into a bag looking for drugs or money and anything else that would be "the big catch" and it is just not true. Many of the TSOs would rather go through their entire career without finding anything other than the odd pocket knife or soda (it means that they are safer in general AND they don't have to run the chance of testifying in court!). Some TSOs may say they are doing this, and to those I say - Bad idea, it can get you in trouble. Oh yeah, if I find a weapon the correct response is to notify the STSO and let them move forward, so yes the response is exactly the same, but the situations are not. |
Originally Posted by knotyeagle
(Post 13098823)
Gee so I wonder why your trained document checkers have been declining them as acceptable ID then. Or the use of US Military ID at Panama City, St. Petersburg, etc.
A bit too much for the trained document checkers on what the "rule-du-jour" is or do they just make it up as they go along? |
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13102081)
Again, I cant presume to speak for others, only myself. I hope you don't hold that against me, my soothsaying skills are pretty lame.:cool:
I'm sure you see the behavior at GSO many days/week. I see the behavior at different TSA checkpoints (such as FLL, CLL, AUS, HOU, MCO, MDW, OAK, APW, MKE, DAL, SAT, CAK, etc) weekly. And my solution is to confront the screener directly when he/she is not following the procedure. Eric vin Lynn at Appleton (ATW) on 2 Aug was insistent that my shoes had be on the belt rather than in the bin by themselves. I asked him about the shoes in my carry-on back and he replied logic is not the issue. It did not work out well for him or lead screener Jimmy Bromlee. |
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 13102070)
Fear profits a man nothing.
"Fear profits a man nothing, unless he can land a TSA contract." |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:20 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.