GUWonder

IIRC, the puffers which the TSA purchased had too much down time and were too difficult for the TSA to calibrate and maintain. They also were more expensive to acquire, install and maintain than the small ETD machines.

Remember when people who disliked pat-downs thought the strip search machines would be the end of most pat-downs? We have more TSA pat-downs taking place now than used to take place before the strip search machines were first installed; and using the strip search machines doesn't stop the pat-down chances.

petaluma1

Of course it doesn't stop the chances of a grope, it increases chances because they alarm so often on nothing.

Boggie Dog

I find it odd that most of the supporting comments are from names never seen on the TSA Blog before. Perhaps there is an effort to get supporting comments.

Regardless, the article TSA put up seems to be completely false. The laptop was in a book bag which was seen on x-ray and it seems events from that point on were to make an example of the boy for his failure to remove the laptop. This was an example of retaliation by TSA screeners.

Even if the laptop alarmed for explosive residue how does an aggressive pat down of this boy resolve that alarm? Why not use the one tool that TSA has that detects explosive residue? The evidence as seen in the video and using just simple logic points again to TSA retaliation, nothing more.

The TSA Blog already has a serious lack of integrity based on past less than truthful stories and articles so I will believe the CBS accounting of this story over the TSA's accounting.

TSA is welcome to offer some evidence to support their claims.

Boggie Dog

The puffers were too difficult for TSA employees to maintain. Puffers work fine in other applications. I don't think it was the machines that were the problem.

GUWonder

And for WTMD, they made the machines more sensitive and even got some machines that alarm "randomly" to increase the numbers of people sent for "additional" "screening". That means more touching opportunities for the TSA so eager to paw our bodies.

FliesWay2Much

You tell me. The first comment was posted 19 minutes after Blogdad Bob posted his fiction.

FliesWay2Much

The victim's mom posted on @ASKTSA. (Found out you can read Twitter without having an account.) They responded with drivel asking her if she'd like to speak with a manager. No way she will get to unload on the FSD. I'll bet she talked to somebody like Lisa Farbstein or Nico.

People on Twitter really need to reach out to her and perhaps even direct her our way.

Boggie Dog

Not much people here can do. What this family needs is a civil activist group who is willing to take up her cause and even then if it's not a pretty sure thing they won't touch it.

The only other people who can bring change to TSA are Congress or the Administration. The courts defer to government instead of citizens and TSA regulations make it exceedingly difficult to even have an issue addressed by the courts.

gsoltso

The puffers were not designed for the type of environment that they were being used in. The cost of maintenance/calibration/testing for them were roughly triple the original estimates (consumables like filters, testing items, etc). This pushed the cost ratio way into the red on them, so they mothballed them. I personally would love to see the agency re-visit these in the future, with improvements, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

The puffers work great, they just did not assimilate well to an active checkpoint atmosphere.

Boggie Dog

OK, the puffers worked great. Perhaps just some re engineering of the filtration systems was all that was needed.

But please explain if you can why an alarm on a laptop or other physical item results in a pat down of a person. How does that pat down resolve the alarm on the physical item?

GUWonder

The courts are as good as useless in this area, until and unless they want to tie the administrative search and consent search doctrines to the technological capabilities of the day. Then maybe there is some hope.

petaluma1

Coming to somewhat of a defense of the first poster, he did call out the TSA for not using new technologies that would "surely advance the mission." At the same time, I would bet a small sum that he knew the post was coming. Maybe it was someone inside TSA who is also disgusted with the inability to resolve alarms without resorting to assaulting passengers.

GUWonder

Isn't the cost of the TSA now close to triple what we were told it would cost when people were clamoring for a government takeover of airport security and bought into the mantra of "federalize to professionalize"?

It's too bad we haven't gotten rid of the way-too-expensive TSA as we know it and put the US aviation security ball back into the hands of the US DOT/FAA, airport authorities and the airlines. It would make things cheaper and make this kind of standardized groping of even children's sexual/private parts a lot harder to institute and maintain without massive pushback.

FliesWay2Much

Just for kicks, I looked at the POTUS's Twitter site. Somebody posted asking him how he would react if the TSA did this to Barron.

Boggie Dog

Was there an answer?