Can you explain 6c a bit?

May have answered my own question.

Non - Covered Law Enforcement Officer's Occupation

Positions that typically do not qualify As Law Enforcement Officer Positions under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) and the Federal Employees' Retirement System (FERS)

Assistant U.S. Attorneys;Bureau of Engraving and Printing Police;DEA Diversion Investigators;DHS Federal Protective Service;DOD Police;GPO Police;Guards at Government buildings or other facilities;IRS Revenue Officers;Mint Police;Secret Service Special Officers;VA Police.

I'm going to play devil's advocate & take a different tack from most of the people posting on this thread and say that yes, TSA should be armed. I want them armed. If they're armed then they will do stupid things because they are, overall, stupid people. That will hasten their demise as an organization. I think TSA gunning down a few people is worth it if it hastens their departure - don't Americans agree that the blood of a few patriots is needed sometimes to further the cause of liberty (or some such rubbish)? The dude wasn't speaking metaphorically there.

I just realized reading the CNN article that many people on both the left and the right side of the political spectrum are probably opposed to arming the TSA, so I can relax...

The Left: Already hates the TSA invading their civil liberties.
The Right: Is opposed to any expansions of government.*

*This is excepting the crazy right that believes all pilots, flight attendants, grade school teachers, mail carriers, and just about everyone else should be armed.

How would that hasten their departure? When was the last time the government got rid of an agency because it did stupid things?

From the TSA Screener job description:

“Assists superiors and Law Enforcement Officers with observation of incidents” (bolding mine)

Does not sound like the Front Line in Airport Security. :rolleyes:

When TSA was created they used the standard OPM handbook to create the screener classification SV-1802. Due to the nature of the position they used the closest GS position as the basis, specifically GS-1802, Compliance Inspection and Support Series.

Federal police are 0083 series. To convert all 55,000 screeners to allow guns would be a massive and expensive undertaking even if it was possible (No) and desirable (Oh He!! NO).

Granted, as an underlying premise I'm assuming public clamour & demand would cause that after they off granny #4 and wing Cute Child We Thought Was a Threat #6. I'd be pretty sad if that premise were proven untrue.

Arm the average TSA clerk? No, no, and HELL NO!


Even my podunk hometown airport has an LEO present when the couple flights a day are getting ready to board.

Sure, but they dont have the right to carry guns in their workplace.

Everyone has ignored you, but I'll take to highlight this ignornace


NO, you cannot take a moron, train them and get a LEO!!!!!!!!

TSOs were not hired using criteria that can result in an employee that can be armed- they are, by and large, flawed humans.

Training will not make idiots into trustworthy armed officers.

And any 'careful screening program to weed out those that may not be qualified' will suffer the same flaws as the rest of TSA programs.

Finally, people need to settle down and recognize that one TSA officer was killed out of 7billion passngers screened... (refernce above)

Keep Calm, Carry on.

You pretty much explained it in your posting. ^

Its simply a retirement system that the US Gov offers certain employees, mainly Federal LEOs.

Though, all BOP employees fall under it as well.....

One has to be into the system no later that 37 years of age so they can retire by 57.

There are exemptions mainly for military and folks that were in the system and got out for a while and wanting back in.

As stated, some Federal LEO jobs do not qualify for it. Why...? Who freaking knows....

If I thought for a minute that arming TSA clerks would hasten the agency's demise in the scenario you suggest, I might seriously consider it. The reality, however, is that federal agencies are like cockroaches - there is no way to completely exterminate one, no matter how righteous the cause for elimination might be.

.... except they do make good money when doing the VIPER stuff away from their "home" area. Even when not going away, some want the hours anyway.

I basically agree. However, in your analysis what the Left hates is often created by what the Right opposes.

I consider myself a member of the later group, your classification of craziness notwithstanding.

I am going to firmly stake out my position on the "should be armed side" with the following restrictions (same as I would say for the pilots, et al, above, "just about everyone else" excluded):

1. It should only be allowed of those that voluntarily ask for it.
2. Those volunteers should be thoroughly vetted by an extensive background check.
3. They should be required to undergo psychological evaluations.
4. They will be subject to random substance abuse screening.
5. They will be required to re-qualify annually (or some other reasonable period).
6. They will be required to submit to constitutional restrictions typical of an LEO and not the current less restrictive administrative restrictions.

It should not ever be done by arming all TSO's unless of course all of them meet the qualifications above, a highly unlikely possibility without the near total re-building of the organization.

We may disagree on this topic, but I want to highlight your respectful and thought out response to my post, notwithstanding my slightly leading wording in the previous post. I wish everyone on FT rose to this level of discourse, so thanks.

Here's an idea. Don't arm the TSA because it would be an expansion of government and we know it will lead to an Orwellian state. Instead let's get good people with guns kind of like a volunteer posse to stand guard. After all the only thing keeping bad guy with a gun out of the airport is a good guy with a gun!

;)

I'm sure George Zimmerman would be glad to offer his services. ;)

If by some chance TSA employees were armed and had police powers would that impact their ability to conduct an Administrative search?

I was wondering the same thing. It also got me wondering how courthouse security compares. At my county courthouse, sheriff's deputies run the metal detectors/x-ray and I seem to recall (it has been a while since I've been there) that US Marshals handle it at the federal courthouse. Are these LEOs also performing an administrative search?

He must be on the job already. There have been no attacks at SFB. :rolleyes:

Also, my tiger repellent rock works perfectly. Never seen a tiger in my yard.

.....

They also have to take (and pass) psychological exams.

I threw "should tsa be armed poll" into a google search. Here are a few results. No, they are not statistically significant, given that it's just a bunch of people on the internet, but the numbers from the three separate polls are scarily similar to each other. Note: These were the first three results I got on google that seemed to be from relatively non-partisan sources. YMMV.

here

here

here

Mike

All three polls only having the "No do not arm" side ahead by about 20 points. I thought it would be higher.

Where is the choice for "Get rid of this disgusting, un-American agency!"? :(

We have a tragic incident at an airport and suddenly there's talk about expending millions of dollars training and arming another quasi-military force (instead of ramping up and/or better deploying security). For that matter, what's with all the cameras? More cameras monitoring the landside area/checkpoint area with backroom monitors scanning for trouble - better, wider perspective, can quickly alert someone on the ground to take a closer look - would also be an option.

At any rate, consensus seems to be quickly spend plenty of taxpayer $$$.

After the Colorado theater shooting, where far more lives were lost, why wasn't there an immediate demand for armed guards in all theaters? Aren't innocent civilian lives worth just as much as government employee lives?

Oh, wait...armed guards in theaters would have to be paid for by theater owners, by jacking up ticket prices, not by taxpayers.

In one case, it's a wise and pragmatic use of taxpayers' $$$; in the other, too much to spend on something statistically unlikely.

In the same vein as my earlier suggestion to buy armor for any screener who wants it, TSA could put snare nets on the ceiling over every checkpoint. Anything bad goes down, instead of calling a Code Bravo, they just push a button and everybody in the area gets snared. Keeps the bad guy corraled while LEOs show up. Keeps the passengers in other areas of the terminal safe.

Might have a bad outcome for the innocents trapped along with the bad guy, but it's like being on the undesirable side of a waterproof hatch as the ship goes down. Sometimes you lose the draw.

The greatest good for the greatest number, and all that.

Why buy armor for every TSO? Do like commercial operators do: have a supply of armor (with the wars winding down, DHS should be able to get it from the military) and let TSOs who want to check it out at the beginning of shift and return it at the end of shift. Keep strict inventory control and deduct the cost of any missing vests from the last individual who checked it out.

For those who want tailor-made armor or something a cut above, do what construction workers do: buy your own, deduct the cost on your taxes. Don't file deductions? Well, then you're no worse off than a construction worker who buys his own hard hat and steel toe boots.

The answers don't always have to be 'Quick! Find someone who will give us an answer if we sign a contract to pay a lot of taxpayer $$'.

True....but all the folks I know that get stuck on that crap end up in their home areas and don't make what they make flying.....so most don't care for it....

The only issue with the military stuff is that it's bulky and one would suspect that folks would have issues wearing it and trying to do their jobs....

That's why LE wears soft body armor under their uniforms. Lighter and less restrictive. We only wear the "military" stuff when we are going on raids when rifles totting bad-guys could be in the picture.....

I could only imagine watching some of the fat dudes/chicks wearing the bulky military stuff and dropping out at a checkpoint due to dehydration..... then suing the GOV....

If the airport is so dangerous that TSOs need body armor, passengers need it as well.

^+100
BINGO!!! We have a winner!!!

They still get LEAP which is nothing to sneeze at. 25% of base salary for what?

The same can be said for TSA employees "needing" firearms.

Not sure what base is now days....but you are correct...it's nothing to sneeze at.

Even an ICE/DHS SA at a GS9 makes good money....

But, as stated, most of what they get comes from their per diems while flying....and it ticks them off when that cash isn't flowing in as well.....

OTOH, many TSOs are vets, so they're used to wearing that stuff and doing far trickier jobs in much much worse conditions. Diddling pax and checking IDs and watching an xray would be a doddle for anyone whose been in combat, toting a much heavier load.

I vote no on the weapons. Way to much room for one of my arschloch coworkers to be playing around in the break room or dropping it while taking a crap or even leaving it hanging on the back of the stall door. Bring back the LEOs to the checkpoints, this is their area of work. How about a $500k reward for the first person to take the shooter down? Seems like our society is adopting a wussyfication of run and hide.

It seems to me that real LEO's don't need a "dead or alive" reward to do their jobs.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

This kind of thinking is exactly why TSO's shouldn't be carrying firearms.

~~ Irish

It was reported that TSA had a reward system in place for certain finds and such at one time. That may help frame the thinking of tsadude1.

FAM's I would guess would be in the range of GS-10 to GS-12 on the TSA equivalent pay scales. Figure in locality pay and LEO. A DFW area GS 11-5 makes $68771, kick in 25% LEAP and that takes it up to 85,963. Throw in per diem and I would bet they bust $100,000.

OPM pay scales are available to anyone.

http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-overs...alaries-wages/

edit to add:

The figures above are from the DFW locality LEO salary table.

I have no knowledge of any rewards incentive that you are speaking of. I was simply stating that something be put in place like this for anybody at any location, not necessaily the airport. I dont think that a attacker would do to much damage on a aircraft with the thought of survival on the passenger and crews mind, óso why is it different at the checkpoint?

I'm a little late to this thread, but let me add my own answer to the impressive pile of "Oh, HELL, no!" already out there.

There are already scores of armed government security employees at every airport. They're called "police".

LAX has so many police it needs its own police agency. They even have their own SWAT team.

LAAPD was on site in seconds. LAAPD SWAT was on site in a few minutes. The entire incident lasted maybe 3 minutes, and the shooter never even got through his first magazine. I'd call that pretty impressive police response, considering that a call for an active shooter in a shopping mall, school, or place of business will typically result in cops showing up 5-20 minutes later, establishing a perimeter, and failing to enter for as much as 30-45 minutes while the shooter continues his rampage.

It is simply not necessary to arm TSOs. They already have armed police protecting them.