I understand you were threatened but I also believe that TSA was wrong, possibly criminally wrong, in their actions. They can't just put you on a watch list for doing something that is perfectly legal. Even TSA says what you were doing was ok.

Will you never fly with your lifesaving medicine again?

I don't wear your shoes but I would make it a point in challenging TSA on this point. I would start with a complaint to the DHS OIG with a copy to both of your Senators. I would even consider filing a complaint with the ADA. http://www.ada.gov/filing_complaint.htm

I would routinely take the pills, although perhaps only a bare minimum, and hope that TSA would do something stupid again and if they did I would file a complaint with the local police then and there. I would try to involve the TSM for that terminal and get as many names as possible and then I would contact the consumer advocate from a local TV station. A news spot, "TSA tries to kill passengers" more at 6 PM would do more to fix this than anything else.

You were not in the wrong to take your medicine. You have every right to do so. Don't let these TSA GED Commando's put you in a position of not having your medicine when it is needed.

I only know what I see on TV, in movies, and in documentaries, but AFAIK, explosive nitro is a highly volatile liquid, sensitive to physical disturbance. Shake it, and boom.

I am not 100% certain - and I'm too scared of the NSA to Google it - but I believe that dynamite contains nitroglycerin, but soaked into multiple layers of paper, making it much more stable. But that comes from a movie, so it could be utter hogwash.

I know that medical nitro comes in a liquid spray form, as well as pills and patches. I don't know if the spray is topical or ingestable, though. Everyone in my family who has ever used medical nitro has had the pills. Heck, I have one of those metal nitro pill tubes on my own keychain, even though I've never needed the med - it was my grandfather's, and I've had it on my keychain ever since he passed away in 1997. It just reminds me of him, whenever I look at it.

If I were in your position, I would probably do as Boogie Dog suggests. However, it's your decision and you need to do what's best for YOU, which isn't necessarily what would be best for me if I were in your position.

I know what it's like to choose differently than the majority of FTers; I despise the NoS, but I never opt out, because the idea of a pat down makes my skin crawl. I never opted out even when they had the perv box, and now that the machine uses ATR and makes no image, I have no philosophical objection to it, other than its abysmal rate of false positives and potential for false negatives.

So I support you on not taking your nitro pills, even though I disagree with the decision. It's yours to make. I just hope that one day soon you won't be forced to make that decision any more.

Absolutely agree that Chollie has to make the call whether to carry life saving meds with them or not when traveling.

But, and it is a big but, not taking them because some TSA screener threatened to put them on some list is a non-starter. Isn't going to happen and even if they tried Chollie would win the war if it came to that.

Everything is on Chollie's side in this matter and not on TSA's side.

In an attempt to keep this thread on-topic:

At TPA a mid-50s TSO at the x-ray machine barked "You don't have enough batteries sir!" to which I replied "I'll try harder next time to bring a sufficient amount!"

It was my hurricane go-bag, which had all sorts of electronics & battery packs in it. Probably had at least 48 AA batteries alone.

/Still wish the TSA would become more professional. I've never encountered barking, blue-shirts, tin-stars, water police, shoe carnivals at federal buildings or military installations.

I think that there are some Professional (or at least want to be as Professional as Possible) TSA Employees, they are just hampered by the rules/regs of their employer and that is a lot of the problem right there.

There are also some Light Hearted Ones and that to me says something that I have believed all along, people are people and some are going to be power trippers and some are going to be jerks and some are going to just go through the motions and some are going to be Professional and some are going to be Light Hearted, as that is the nature of us, human beings.

My preference would be for TSA to be more light hearted as an Agency, is that in the cards? I highly doubt it, but it would be nice.

I recently, came across a really nice TSA Employee and I was impressed at how she really worked to be as nice and helpful as possible. She spoke at least three different languages (that I heard) and instead of doing the usual keep yelling to the person who does not speak English until hopefully she/he understands, she spoke softly and tried if she could to speak to them in their language.

It was impressive because it is not how I have witnessed TSA Employees in the past deal with passengers who do not speak English, every other time it would seem the defacto process was to yell at the person who does not speak Englishn until they hopefully understood or either another passenger, airline employee or some other airport worked could translate. It was different because it was Professional and I complimented her on it and she said something that stuck in my mind. I would hope that if my Grandparents who do not speak English were to come to a checkpoint like this one someone would try and communicate with them in their language if they could, not just yell at them in English, so I do the same for others as I would like for my Grandparents

She remembered that we are PEOPLE and not all would be bad apples, she treated each and everyone of us with respect and while I may not agree with how TSA does this or that, I do feel that being respectful should be part of the equation. My few negative run ins with TSA, I always feel like I am being treated like a would be bad apple, rather than just another person.

Coming back around, if TSA had the mantra of the people being screened are just average ordinary people and not under suspicion (i.e. we are all not bad apples), than being light hearted could be a two way street, as opposed to right now where the passengers note light hearted TSA Employees, but we ourselves find it hard to be light hearted at a checkpoint because everything we say can bring about negative consequences or at least negative responses from TSA Employee.

As usual, just my two cents.

Most of the TSA incidents we read about are brought about by TSA screeners doing things that are just plain stupid and you can't fix stupid.

Agreed it is stupidity, but IMHO I think part of the stupidity can be explained beyond just stupidity.

In the case of the TSA Employee who swabbed my car and did not take nicely that I was unconcerned with why he was swabbing my car and his distaste for my comment about the car being dirty anyway and if he wanted he could also wash it as well swab it, I think part of the reason for his stupidity in the way he handle the entire situation was because he felt that I was simply another person to be suspicion of and that I (as well as anybody else) could be the next bad apple, vs. just some guy parking his car at the airport.

Clearly the entire process of swabbing my car seems stupid to me, but leaving alone for the moment, IMHO if he did not see me as a potential bad apple, he might have laughed along with me, rather than said, "Sir, Security is not a Laughing Matter".

I do not know, maybe I am wrong, would not be the first time and surly will not be the last, but I feel that stupidity while a good descriptor does not answer the entire question.

Regardless, there are good TSA Employees, some who are even light hearted, but I feel that part of them being "good" or light hearted is that they understand (either because they have not drank the kool-aide or for whatever reason) that we (the flying public) are people just like them and not some pariah or the next would be bad actor ready to do harm to the flying public.

"But Security Theater is a joke."

I get that, I see it as theater, you see it as theater, some portion of society as a whole sees it as theater, but I would wager the Employees who have drank the kool-aid see it as necessary and important to ensure that they are preventing would be bad apples from doing bad things.

If the same dude was told to swab cars in the parking lot, but he knew it was just a job for the sake of theater (using that description) and treated the people he came in contact with as just average people, not potential would be bad apples, the act of swabbing cars can still seem or maybe even is stupid, but the TSA Employee can do his job without acting like he is about to actually catch someone.

IMHO, if he were more light hearted and was willing to laugh with the people he came in contact with, the experience while still smelling of Security Theater might just get a roll eyes rather than leaving a lasting memory of another bad impression of the TSA Front-line Employees.

I get it too and don't disagree that TSA likely ( I have my doubts) has some good, honest, hardworking people.

I think TSA calling itself a counter-terrorism agency, which is really a reach for airport passenger screeners, is a large part of the problem.

Mom and Pop heading off to Vegas are not terrorist, should not be considered terrorist, and should not be treated like potential terrorist. They are also not in prison and should not be treated like they are under arrest. They are not in military boot camp and don't need to be treated like they are.

TSA's silly reliance on SSI to hide the disgusting things they do at checkpoints needs to end.

If your going to feel my "resistance" at least have the backbone to call it what it is, a penis, or other appropriately named body part. I don't need TSA to hide behind polite speak in order to avoid accountability.

If TSA is going to deploy technology at least be honest enough to demonstrate that it has been independently tested and is effective in its role.

TSA screeners are not LEO's. Don't try to make people believe otherwise.

A little effort on building goodwill from the top of TSA down to today's new hire might help change the public's negative perception of TSA and its employees.

Finally, if a TSA screener is a criminal and is caught doing something of a criminal nature while on the job I think the public has every right to know what the person did and exactly what TSA did in response. The individuals privacy should be a secondary concern.

Finally, act like a responsible government agency should act. TSA knew of the screener who was assaulting passengers at Denver and didn't do anything. TSA could have acted sooner but didn't. TSA could have pursued legal charges but did not. And this is just one example. TSA knew that Stacey Armato was illegally held hostage at a TSA checkpoint but as far as I know no legal actions were ever taken against the TSA employees involved. Another case, Phil Mocek, TSA employees gave false reports to police. Phil fought and won the case at great personal expense and it was evident that the TSA employees lied to police yet nothing ever was done to the TSA employees. And in my own case the FLL FSD refused to investigate an attempted theft by a TSA screener. Instead I was told that we have to expect more invasive actions by TSA.

So yeah, I suspect that TSA has some good people the problem is knowing which ones!

Sometimes things are broken beyond repair or the cost of repair is just not economical.

TSA is such a case!

You are on target and I agree with pretty much everything you have said here and elsewhere on the site.

To the point of being an anti-terrorist agency I could not agree more, I too think that is a big part of the problem.

I am not exactly sure what SSI is, but I have seen reference to it before, thus I am guessing some sort of Gov't coding/classification system.

Something the paramedic (who moonlights as a Part Time TSA Employee) said to me today reinforced something you wrote, his Supervisor routinely says that things like pat downs which the Supervisor admits is not pleasant is for the greater good and that TSA is on the front line of aviation safety.

The paramedic thinks most of the rhetoric from his Supervisor is bunk and he says some of his fellow co-workers do too, especially when you are patting down (for example) Mom who is taking the family to Disneyworld or The Frat Brother going on Spring Break to Vegas.

By the way the paramedic is a really good guy, so there are a few good TSA employees out there. He said that he tries to be polite, courteous and professional in his role as TSA Employee, but admits that some of his co-workers do not and in fact can be real jerks. He tries to be light hearted when the moment calls for it and jokes around with the passengers as he believes smiling is contagious.

SSI = Sensitive Security Information. A nonclassification method that does not require a security clearance to access and predates TSA.

http:// https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w...ty_Information

TSA employees should indeed be professional, polite, kind, helpful - a lot of the stuff described by kmersh above. But like any public-facing government employee with any authority (in this case, the authority to touch your property, your person and to allow - or not - you entry to the "secure" side of the airport) there should also be some professional detachment. Smile, sure. Be cheerful, okay. But keep the small talk to a minimum and stop it when the passenger doesn't "play along." And stop the jokes completely.

They are not there to be our friends. They are there to carry out (what some believe is) an essential screening function. They are there because of the (infinitesimal) chance that one of us is a criminal.

We are not there to be their friends. We are there because we want to go somewhere on an airplane. We are there because we have to go through the checkpoint because of the (infinitesimal) chance that one of us is a criminal.

I make small talk with my friends. I'll make small talk with a stranger at the boarding gate or the lounge or the bus stop, because we share the common ground of fellow travellers, and because either of us can walk away if we don't feel like continuing.

I make jokes with my friends. If they tease me I can tease them back. We know each others' weak spots and we don't get mean. If my friends don't think my joke is funny, they change the topic; they don't rummage through my handbag and then tell me I can't fly today. My friends don't post signs saying "no jokes allowed" and then make jokes about me.

Before you say TSA should be "light-hearted", go back and read the specific examples in the original post. Here's my score:
1) Based on mistake about the passenger's t-shirt logo, the TSA employee attempts to find common ground with passenger over a video game. Not actually offensive, just unnecessary. Dude, he's going to be gone in a minute and you'll never see him again - you don't need to bond.

2) "Joking" about not allowing an object. Blatant and cruel abuse of authority, hiding behind "just kidding." Wrong wrong wrong.

3) The fact that he knew a bunch of languages is cool. Having someone available to help with translation when needed is cool. The fact that TSA pays someone to "walk up and down the line rattling out instructions" is not cool. A simple signboard using pictures is cheaper and more effective. (Visit absolutely any international airport outside the USA for examples). The fact that he was "trying to determine" people's nationalities could be an attempt to be helpful or it could be BDO profiling or it could be just showing off. There's no obligation to discuss one's nationality with TSA, and some people may not want to reveal personal information in front of a group of strangers.

4) As with (1), not offensive just unnecessary. The passengers are not there to help you deal with your loneliness or homesickness. Stifle the need to make small talk.

Well said.