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. ;)