I totally agree, but there are plenty of hot heads and anger mismanagement types out there.
I'm just waiting to see something juicy happen, so I can take a step back and start clapping!
I certainly would not try to defend a blue shirt.


Shameless plug: Check out freedom to travel usa - Organized national effort.

I tell the same thing to the officers during training: take a step back; that usually defuses the situation. If the person comes at you, take another step back.

Some of our folks don't need any additional help defending themselves. It is these folks that I was thinking about when I addressed this issue. ;)

They know nothing else. People of limited intelligence are limited in their ability to formulate meaningful options. The people who migrate to screener jobs have, for the most part, lived lives of abject powerlessness. Retaliation is easy. It takes very little critical thought. McDonalds fry cooks spit in their customers food because they can. It's the only thing they think they have the power to do. Rational reflection takes effort.One-stripers are not paid to think. They are trained to mindlessly react. Stimulus A (shoes in the bin) gets autonomic reaction A (incessant barking.)

Good for them. Clearly these folks have a soul and a conscience.

unlike some.

And that'd be another problem with the TSA. Critical thinking is either a negative selection at hiring, or what little capability the TSA clerk has for critical thinking is trained out of them.

(And that's probably the only training success the TSA has - they've certainly shown an abject inability to train their personnel in something as simple as "don't harass the photographers or you'll end up on Youtube - and it isn't a violation of TSA policy to engage in photography at the checkpoint, either!")

I'm not throwing opinion around-- just fact--- you are throwing opinion around. Let's review:

Ari's fact: The selectee list is not intended to be used as punishment for being violent toward a TSO-- there are certain criteria to get on that list (which are somwhat SSI but somewhat public) and punching a TSO isn't among the criteria.

Bart's opinion: Violent acts directed to a TSO should be one of the criteria that adds one to the selectee list for life.

I am stating how the list works now (a fact); you are stating how you think the list should work (an opinion). I did not offer any opinion anywhere as how I think the list should work, just a description of how the list works now.

The retaliatory aspect of that poster's opinion cannot be denied. But why stop with making sure someone who "assaults" a tsa clerk (like perhaps that japanese lady in phoenix, who may have been acting to defend herself) gets the permanent ssss marker. why not also extend the ssss list to folks who are involved in the fight against tsa procedures, perhaps to those who make public statements against the tsa, such as this forum?

i'm having trouble following the logic that because a passenger reacts to TSA gropings, they are a danger to aircraft crew and other passengers, none of whom are groping that passenger. but then again, I don't work for TSA.

It certainly does. You advocate not only the application of legitimate, LEGAL punishment for a criminal act (or, conceivably, a NON-criminal one, as defense against assault is not a crime in most places - and a karate-chop to the testicles DOES qualify as assault!:mad:), but also the application of permanent, non-revocable, non-appealable, non-judicial punishment as well.

While no extra punishment is applied to our hypothetical screener assaulting hundreds of passengers per day - indeed, no punishment AT ALL is applied ofttimes, despite the routine violation of what is reported to be the Terrorist Support Agency's standard operating procedures in opt-out searches and general operations overall.

No, no double standard there at ALL... :rolleyes::td::td::td:

FAIL. Period, full-stop, FAIL.

Your agency already condones not only the blatant, without-justified-cause violation of the rights of millions of travellers per year, but turns a deliberate blind eye to theft, abuse, and violence being committed against those travellers BY YOUR AGENCY'S SCREENERS - but when someone has taken all they can take, and maybe responds to that last karate-chop to the testicles with a right hook, THAT'S suddenly "unacceptable under any circumstances"???:td:

FAIL.

You guys are lucky none of you HAVE been laid out yet by those you abuse.

Apparently when dealing with the Terrorist Support Agency's general staff, you need to get their undivided attention first.

Response to a physical attack can legitimately include the return of physical force. Even moreso under these conditions, as there is *ZERO* accountability for agents of the Terrorist Support Agency committing such acts against the innocent traveller.

You're under the impression that this is not already happening.

It has happened. To me, for example. To that CNN reporter as another example.

I did have what happened to that reporter in the back of my mind. I didn't know about your case.

I guess the due process clause as well as the 4th Amendment are just a few of the parts of the Constitution that don't apply to the TSA.

Don't karate chop me and you won't have to buy it. Train your minions not to injure me and they won't have to buy it either. I was too surprised when it happened at the time, but I've been prepared during each and every encounter since then. When my arms are outstretched during the perp frisk, my hands are now always balled into fists, ready to defend myself... and two of your fellows have noticed, and asked about it. One apologized for what had happened, the other ran to mommy (3 striper) and caused a scene.

The majority of your fellow TSA employees don't get too vigorous during the pat down, but I can guarantee that at least one in ORD does/did. I don't know where you are based, nor do I care. I am ready, and willing to defend myself every time I go thru the checkpoint these days... and it is very sad that I have to be ready to defend myself against people who are supposed to be helping me. Very sad indeed.

I'm still waiting for an explanation why someone who may have been wantonly violent their whole dadgum life doesn't get the auto-SSSS, but someone who is (perhaps capriciously) charged with something at the checkpoint is branded for life.

It can't possibly be that "Some animals more equal than others" thing rearing its ugly head YET AGAIN... could it?...

No, it's a "Respect my authoritah" situation. Bart is channeling Cartman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Cartman

IMO he would have to climb Mt McKinley to come up to the level of Cartman.