^

Thank you for providing your rational analysis of the issue.

Wow, four whole days of class room training. Well, that is almost the same as a PhD. :eek:

1) I'm sorry, that's between me and my spiritual advisor
2) It's personal
3) Also personal
4) I'm sorry, that's confidential
5) Also confidential

Under the TSA's rules, those are all reasonable answers that would not lead to a secondary. I'm sure, though, that it could lead to one based on "failure to show proper respect."

Couldn't agree with you more. Just because the TSA is now doing some that the folks at TLV do doesn't mean that it's the same program.

Not a chance. I'm far more afraid of being hit by a drunk driver than I am about a terrorist on my plane. Statistics would support me. I swear, if the TSA ran the highways, we'd all be forced to drive at 20 MPH and stopped every 50 yards for an inspection.

Sadly, I'm not.

Mike

Where did you get your law degree, and where are you licensed to practice? Because I haven't seen anything, either in statutory law or precedent that suggests, even remotely, that this process is constitutional (nor its backup, the mandatory x-ray or grope).

What to do with the TSA short term-


1. Stop the use and deployment of body scanning machines. They don't see into body cavities, under folds of flesh, or detect explosives. They are an intrusion into privacy and needlessly add to cumulative lifetime radiation doses, and there are no peer-reviewed studies that back up the government's claim they are safe.

Properly procured and administrated use of Explosive Trace Detection Portals (puffers) addresses the technical shortcomings of the body scanners, while at the same time are non-intrusive and pose no health risks. It’s unfortunate that the Chertoff Group and other lobbyists that profit from the deployment of body scanners have no interest in ETP technology that is being used in venues as varied as nuclear installations and the CN Tower in Toronto.

ETP, coupled with Walk Through Metal Detectors and x-ray of bags, is real security at the checkpoint, without the need for genital gropes.

2. Full accountability of TSA employees. A Citizen Review Board should be established to investigate allegations of screener abuse. Initiate a focus on customer service training for screeners, instead of barking and asking “Do you want to fly today?”


3. End the War on Liquids. The exemptions make it pointless, and even if there was such a Magic Liquid™ that could be used to create a bomb airside without laboratory conditions if you just had enough of it, just send ten guys through the checkpoint with their Kippie Bags and combine it airside.


4. End the removal of shoes. The X-Ray machine cannot detect explosives, period.


5. Eliminate the gate screenings. The fact that this is being done in MCI, where each gate area pretty much has its own checkpoint to start with, is proof that this is nothing more than security theatre and workfare.


4. The wearing of metal “police” badges is stopped immediately, and replaced with the screener’s name and identification number that is plainly visible. Phase out the “police” uniform and replace it with something that reflects the fact that screeners have no law enforcement powers. Eliminate the TSA Honor Guard as there is no need for screeners to dress up in costumes and parade around. Stop trying to cash in on the respect that people that serve in the military have earned.


5. Get rid of the No Fly List. There’s no effective means of redress or oversight how the list is managed. If the people on these lists are so dangerous, arrest them.


6. Stop trying to encroach on privately owned aircraft and kill LASP dead in its tracks. The Inspector General has determined that private aircraft are not a threat. Personal Liberties — For the first time, the TSA’s regulatory activities would be extended to personal GA aircraft, historic and vintage aircraft, and operators, passengers, and pilots flying for personal and business use. As such, the LASP is a radical departure from anything the TSA has enacted to date. It would, in effect, require governmental review and authority before you could operate your own personal vehicle.


7. Stop the ID checks. The TSA has no need to know who I am or where I’m flying. This is nothing more than revenue protection on behalf of the airlines. The thought that I must “present my papers” to travel within the border of my own country is disgusting. Stop using the checkpoint as a dragnet. College kids with fake IDs, illegal aliens, or some common criminal wanted on a drug charge somewhere are not a threat to commercial aviation. We have other government agencies tasked for this.


8. End the mission creep. No more TSA appearances at sporting events, bus and train stations, or highways. Let the real law enforcement professionals tasked with these venues handle things without interference from the TSA. Why is the TSA showing up at thousands of non-airport venues every year when the own Red Team test score failures are "off the charts" according to Rep. Mica?


9. The junk science SPOT program gets the boot.


10. Stop any consideration of having screeners armed with firearms, or having any law enforcement powers. We hear of continuous cases where airport LEOs are the last line of defense against abuse by TSA screeners.



What to do with the TSA long term-

The TSA should become a part of the DOT. Actual screening should be done by private contractors with oversight by the FAA. Funny how we never heard the constant stories of mistreatment and harassment of PAX, organized rings of theft and general thuggery when this was being done by private sector firms.




If wishes and dreams were candy and nuts, it would be Christmas all year long.



Would auto body classes at Cuyahoga Community College count? :p



Of course not, for many reasons; first of all, have you seen the people that do the questioning in TLV? They are smokin' hawt, and that's not a coincidence. Even with over an $8 billion dollar budget this year, the most the TSA can attract is of this caliber.

While the TSA can't prosecute you for refusing to answer their questions, they can keep you off the plane. While some have argued that things like the "no fly" list constitute an unconstitutional abrogation of freedom of movement, existing legal doctrine unfortunately seems to support it.

Also, it's not clear that those other three-letter agencies are categorically more competent and less intrusive than the TSA. (Look up the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program, for instance. Or look at the Christmas bomber, who evaded the FBI and might have succeeded if it were easy to get a better bomb through the checkpoint.) The TSA is just more transparent and visible to the public.

Let's take this one point at a time --

1. By law and OPM rules, one location for the federal government cannot have different qualifications than any other location for the same grade and series of job. All federal jobs are classified by series (i.e.: expertise and skills) and grade (salary). Educational requirements are one of those qualifications that are standard. If you look at the 1801 or 1802 series, which are the ones the TSA seems to use for SPOTNiks, you will see standard qualifications.

Although I only pulled from the PHL vacancy, there were seven others from seven other airports. Some expanded the experience requirements for some reason to include experience as a prison guard (no joke).

2. Ann Davis is a TSA public affairs officer and is fair game. Unless you are really Ann Davis, I really don't care if you are personally offended. (Even if you ARE Ann Davis, I don't care if you were offended.)

We will call out public TSA officials when they lie anytime and for any reason. I have no reason to believe her for a nanosecond. If, in fact, any SPOTNik has a college degree, it's arguably more a result of the economy or the individual's marketable skills, because it's not a requirement for the job.

Thanks.

I thought you were addressing your comments to me, rather than Ms. Davis. I apologize for my misinterpretation.

I think this was in response to the original "How would you make the TSA better?"

I stick with my original suggestion.

Mike

I believe it is limited to the A Terminal. For now.

Mike

No problem... It's Friday!

I understand exactly what you are saying. I get the same way when a police car is driving behind me, even though I know I have done nothing to break the law and never have.

I don't see where refusing to answer questions, in and of itself, will result in being refused access to the sterile area. Additional, possibly retaliatory, secondary screening perhaps, but once someone and their belongings are screened for weapons, explosives and incendiaries they will be admitted.




Here it is on the TSA jobs site. Behavior Detection voodoo practitioners need to pass a drug test and read English, so at least we have that going for us. :rolleyes:

It's shocking to me the level of risk-aversion so many otherwise intelligent people have on FT.

0 terrorist incidents in 10 years. 2 very poor attempts.

Ok, you want more "safety" than that? And you have a multi-billion $ budget?

Why are you asking for more airport security, then? Your own personal drive to the airport is so much more dangerous.

Why not fund permanent sobriety checkpoints at high volume highway entrances instead?

So much more effective...

The suggestions for yet-more airport "security" - methods that are not scientifically proven and don't even seem effective under the lens of common sense - sounds utterly foolish.