gsoltso

That is a bit distrubingly worded and could easily be misunderstood. Perhaps a better statement would have been "a target of the new congress"...

You are not taking into account that maybe the information Bob was given was not as complete as it could have been.

Rolando Negrin is responsible for the result of his situation, the person that commented to him was responsible for the start of the situation. If Negrin had a big enough problem with folks making commentary, he should have followed up with a complaint and gone up the chain with it.

First, welcome to FT!

Second, you are wrong based on the SOP. The procedures in the SOP are not molestation or sexual assault, not even close. I would allow any member of my family to be screened using the procedures in the SOP, heck I would allow myself to be screened. As a matter of fact, I have participated in training classes where I have had the standard patdown performed on my person, and it is not anything like what the vast majority of comments I have seen here indicate. The fact is that the procedure is simply used to make certain there are no prohibited items on a passenger. How many of the standard pat downs have you been through? The most common phrase I hear on the checkpoint after a patdown here is "thats it"? There are many things that are blown out of proportion by many media outlets and some of the postings here.

srilm

Using a cell phone is a choice. Being an American is about accepting risks that are personally accepted by you, not forced upon you. And there is dispute about how dangerous these x-rays really are.

No one wants no security. The backscatter and patdowns are false security. I want real security.

To this very day, there is NOTHING that occurs at a TSA checkpoint that would prevent the 9/11 attackers from doing the exact same thing again. Only other measures, away from the checkpoint, prevent that (reinforced doors, armed pilots, change in passenger attitudes).

While the polls I have seen vary greatly, the VAST majority of Americans have never had to go through this humliating experience. The only accurate poll would only include people who have undergone this experience.

Majority rules do not apply to basic rights guaranteed by the constitution. Even if everyone in the USA thinks that one person should be subjected to an unreasonable search, it's still a violation of the constitution.

I harbor no ill will toward any particular TSA agent. Many were hired before this new "procedure" went into effect and now they're stuck with it. I applaud those who fight for change and a return to focus on security measures that work.

SR

Bumblebee123

What she/he said.


-----------------
What part of "Don't Touch My Junk" don't YOU understand?

MDtR-Chicago

Arrrghhh... I am so sick of hearing this line from TSA employees.

Please. If for no other reason than you add a badly needed potentially sane TSA viewpoint to this discussion... never say that again.

Some of us are sick of seeing fellow travelers physically shaken and anxious after a thorough groping to believe these instances are statistical anomalies. People do have a problem with the pat-down. Just because your handful of colleagues at one particular airport get it "right", that means little to those dealing with the many irresponsible TSOs out there.

edj3

OK please read what eyecue posted in the pat down breasts question thread here and tell me that you are still OK with a woman in your family having to lift and separate her own breasts.

How is this remotely OK with any sane, rational, reasonable human being?

MDtR-Chicago

I'm impressed with the many positive examples of ethical behavior exhibited by FlyerTalk posters.

The reason I posed the challenge was to encourage just a little temperance. It's only been about a month. This is not an easy decision, especially for someone with only a high school education.

(For the record, since some of you asked - yes, I have quit on the spot, when dealing with an unethical manager. I've also stayed and worked within the system to try to change behavior for the better.)

Though I have to admit... my patience is also wearing thin. Especially after watching a gaggle of TSOs being trained on the pat-down procedure. They could barely get through the embarrassment of trying it out on each other. Lots of blushing and giggling. But I know, when I go back to that airport, they'll all have no problem delivering the same pat-down to the rest of us.

No one seemed to make the connection that if it's inappropriate to do those things to a co-worker, it is doubly inappropriate to do those things to a customer.

Caradoc

Prove it.

Show us the SOP.

IrishDoesntFlyNow

Of course. It's much easier to perform these humilitating actions on a dehumanized stranger than on a known human being/coworker/friend.

~~ Irish

gsoltso

I am sorry you are tired of hearing that MDtR, but it is actually the truth! I post based on my experiences and what I can see, hear and read about. I can tell you that in the last week alone, I have heard that (apparently dreaded) phrase at least 15 times. I do not discount the other postings here, as I can neither verify nor disprove the vast majority of them. Some of the complaints you hear here are completely truthful and point to situations where TSOs are either incompetent or have ulterior motives, some of them are gross exaggerations due to emotional involvement, some are folks that purposely post falsehoods to further their own agenda - the problem is determining which ones are which and that is probably not going to happen in the vast majority of cases. I do not write them off as statistical anomalies, and I want the individual situations addressed directly. If someone does something that is outside the SOP, then they need proper punitive or corrective action taken. I am extremely lucky in that I work at a smaller airport, and do not see anything even remotely like what is posted here on a regular basis.

Our most likely claim to fame is this event that made the blog at TSA:

http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2009/04/dishing-dirt.html



I will have to claim off on this one, as I have not read that and have not trained on female pat down for almost 2 years. I have only recieved the male equivalent for familiarity and I am currently an BDO.

I will say that hiding items under body parts is a well known smuggling tactic for contraband and is easily scaled to include dangerous items.

And to answer your question, after doing the research and based on my previous experiences - yes, I am comfortable with my family members being screened per the SOP. I guess we just look at things differently.

Already covered that earlier, no can do due to SSI.

If you are being professional and doing what you are supposed to it is just as easy to patdown a parent/spouse/child as it is to do a stranger.

iowakatie1981

And therein lies part of the problem, although I will probably be accused of being education-ist or some other stupid PC blah.

If a person is not well-educated enough to make moral and ethical decisions regarding the necessary duties of his/her position, he/she is not well-educated enough for that position. Practically everyone I know who holds a professional position had, as a part of their education, to take at least one ethics class - this includes business professionals, lawyers, doctors, nurses, journalists, teachers, pastors, etc. All of these people are then held accountable to the ethical standards set by their profession.

Every professional out there is going to encounter moral and ethical dilemmas from time to time, and part of being a professional in one's chosen line of work is having the ability to navigate these dilemmas. If TSAs want to be treated as "professionals," they need to start behaving like it. Saying "it's hard for them because they only have a high-school education" is not acceptable.

Caradoc

Exactly.

All the public has to go on is what we're told at the checkpoint - after we've bought the ticket and are trying to go somewhere.

That said, I am reasonably certain that someone walking into a bar and groping a random stranger as per the SOP would be immediately charged with battery if not sexual assault.

A US Army staff sergeant has gone on the record as saying the "enhanced pat-down" being performed at the airport is more intrusive than the regular pat-down performed by US armed forces in the field when searching suspected enemy combatants who are not actually under arrest.

As per a strict interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 2331 - assuming that deliberate exposure to ionizing radiation is indeed inimical to human life as agreed by pretty much every radiologist on the plant - I believe the TSA is now a "domestic terror" group.

(5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that -
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation
of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended -
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of
the United States.

Namely, if someone declines to be irradiated by the TSA, they will be subjected to a pat-down that appears to be deliberately designed to intimidate or coerce them into allowing the irradiation - and may indeed be forced to allow their genitals to be touched by a stranger even if they do agree to be irradiated, just because someone didn't get their mandatory training (as noted by the Inspector General's report.)

And to what end? The body-screenings and enhanced pat-downs contribute nothing in the way of actual security, but promote the idea that flyers will be safer despite the gaping holes existing in the system.

It's all pure security theatre. The more I read about TSA screeners using the X-ray to figure out which bags have theft-worthy stuff in them, the more I read about TSA screeners being convicted of sexual assault, stalking, kidnapping, rape, the more I read about Chertoff's profits and hear the excuse "I'm only doing my job," the more I believe the TSA should be disbanded entirely.

I don't believe in having no security at the airport. I believe in having no security theatre at the airport.

The current TSA checkpoints are one-way trapdoors for the traveler. There's no way for any of us to make an informed decision about whether or not we agree to "today's" indignities and assaults before entering the checkpoint. Should we decide that "today's" indignities and assaults are unbearable, we're not allowed to decline them or we'll be faced with the probability of an $11,000 fine.

And today's TSA package handlers apparently all agree with this sort of thing.

And despite your repeated claims that the current SOP is "legal," you admit that you don't actually know what it is.

Wholeheartedly agreed.

IrishDoesntFlyNow

Respectfully, GSOL -- malarkey.

I've been an EMT for 30 years. Although I can (and have) treat friends and/or loved ones, it is NOT the same and it is NOT as easy when the loved ones are seriously ill/injured. The normal practice is to turn care over to someone else, if someone else is available.

~~ Irish

Wally Bird

We ascribe the lies, mis- or disinformation to "Bob" because he is the public internet face of the TSA. It has been suggested that perhaps he and the other bloggers may simply be dupes; being told what to post and how to respond.

Doesn't change anything, just pushes the blame upwards to whoever supplied the incomplete[sic] information. But it takes a lot to get a retraction of a falsehood, see the "young boy" thread for more incomplete information from Bob et al.

rubyv

Just thought that this bears repeating.

Munch

Why are male screeners being trained on the female pat-down if, as Blogger Bob alleges, pat-downs are always performed by screeners of the same gender as the passenger being assaulted?

When do you expect Blogger Bob to address Nature's evisceration of the BDO program as a pathetic heap of stupidity, based on nonsense, that wastes millions of dollars and makes absolutely no one, anywhere, safer?

Yes. You have no problem with your family being sexually assaulted and molested.