No bickering needed. Screeners are the 1st line of defense, FAMs are always second. :D :D :p :p

LOL

Wasn't bickering, just a legit question. Maybe I missed something on the hundred daily pages of incidents from all airports.

These were all well after TSA took over in early 02':

http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/...t-security.htm

http://www.boston.com/news/local/art...weapons_tests/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...ity-usat_x.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/...l-security.htm

All articles mentioned are about internal testing which as you should know are designed for failure as a learning tool. Also the articles are from a year ago. Testing at airports (not just the Red Team) have been increased considerably and the failure rate have dropped to very low numbers. The rate will never be zero due to the human factor.

To my knowledge there hasn't been a breach due to a smuggled gun in recent history contrary to your insinuation.

Based on the lack of such reports of it with recent incidents, I assume the FAM policy of holding the entire cabin at gunpoint after their cover is exposed has gone away.

I'm sorry, but describing that policy or those that created/implemented it as "nit wit" seems tame; holding a cabin at gunpoint needlessly terrorizes passengers (and I chose that word carefully) and is my chief complaint with the FAM service. Doing that to innocent men women and children and yelling at them to stay still or else (esp. when it is not to hold an identified threat at bay) is so disgusting I can't think of words. I'm pretty sure if a regular police officer did something similar, he would lose his job or worse. It's like a cop performing a felony stop and throwing a driver on the ground merely because he was going five over the speed limit.

But like I said, it seems this policy has gone away, and if so, that's a huge plus for the FAM service.

Yeah, the FAMs were embarassed because of holding plane loads of innocent pax at gunpoint, and they would have preferred that that "nit wit policy" were not exposed. Too bad you can't silence a few hundred pax, eh? I'm sure they tried to think of a way.

Personally, based on the info I've heard/read, I think the FAM service performed admirably in the "Annie Jacobson" incident. 1) They were on the plane, presumably because they knew there was a suspicious group that was going to be on the plane. 2) They quietly monitored the activity of the suspicious individuals, and supposedly checked the lavs to make sure weird things weren't being left behind. 3) They did not overreact, jump up, tell everyone to sit down, hold the cabin at gunpoint, etc. All in all a shining example of actual protection by the FAMs in my opinion.

The only mistake that seems to have been made was realizing that the Syrian group was out of visa status and deporting them accordingly. But my guess is that the FAMs had nothing to do with that mistake, as it was made on the ground, and I don't think passport/visa control is part of the job mandate for FAMs.

No, there is no indication that they should have been deported. The expiration date of a U.S. visa indicates the day that it can no longer be used to ENTER the U.S. Once a foreigner has legally entered the U.S., it is immaterial.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/skyterror.asp has a good explanation of this at the bottom.

In sum, there is no indication that federal authorities did anything other than what they were supposed to do in this case.

I'll agree that you are being ridiculous!

A: EVERYONE that purchases an airline ticket is a TAXPAYER.
B: Your definition of "Law Abiding" is beyond comprehension. What laws were those terrified passengers breaking????????????????

[QUOTE=FmrBPNowFAM]How much law enforcement experience and experience with firearms do you have? My guess is little to none.[/QOUTE]

None. My field is SECURITY. A field that has been completely ignored by both the TSA and the FAM's.

I'll take my chances with the TSA. There should be NO firearms on commercial aircraft.

So, EVERYONE who thinks the FAM program is idiotic has NO LE experience? Are you sure about that?

aren't there pilots that also carry firearms on their flights?

I think CameraGuy would be opposed to those too...

[QUOTE=CameraGuy]
I'll take my chances with the TSA. There should be NO firearms on commercial aircraft.



According to The New York Times in June an OIG report (that's Office of the Inspector General) the TSA has a 70% failure rate to detect firearms, knives and what we call the will-e coyote bombs. (fake dynamite with wires, not what your gonna see on planes).. By the way, that rate is better than the old security rates.

If you pay attention to the news people get hooked up all the time for trying to carry guns onto plains, usually on the return flight. Meaning they already caried it onboard on the way to vacation.. TSA screenings, like gun laws, keep law abiding citizens from doing harm, they don't keep criminals from doing just "one" more illegal thing.

[QUOTE=BpainHell]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CameraGuy

I'll take my chances with the TSA. There should be NO firearms on commercial aircraft.

---

Do you have a link to the article? Again any numbers were from internal tests.

Passengers get arrested for having guns in their checked baggage which they declare, have licenses for the state they live (and fly out of), but do not have a license for the state they flew to. On their return trip they declare the gun(s), a LEO is called to verify it is unloaded and properly packed and at that time they are arrested for an unlicensed weapon in that state. Some states have reciprocity but states such as New York do not and as such you are not allowed to posses a gun in New York without a New York License. The only exception is if you are participating in a tournament. You then have a 48 hour grace period.

FAMs not part of TSA- haven't been for nearly a yr.

Nope, just part of the DHS along with 21 other departments.

FAMs are part of BTS, no BICE, no ICE.

At least the TSA doesn't change it's name every three months. :D

The times article was forwarded to all of us on the internal ICE updates daily email back in July. And now they have some of our Sups. trying to get things past screeners.
Also, I'm not refering to legally checked weapons, I'm talking carry on bags and purses. I'm not taking a shot at you TSA guys, just pointing out that folks who think guns and knives don't get on board are being naive.

I imagine there's some basis of truth in that report but don't know how applicable that failure rate is today. I will say this, however: it's difficult to truly measure our effectiveness, or ineffectiveness, depending on how you want to view it. We have some methodologies available which will provide some sort of statistical measure, but nothing compares with the reality of a red team inspection. That is to say, nothing beats the pure realism of a "passenger" who places a bag containing a threat object into the x-ray machine.

You seem pretty content to believe you know how unrealistic these test objects are, and I'll leave you blissfully content with your perceptions.

For those who understand: NTC is designed to be harder than combat. Same applies to JRTC, SERE, the Q-course and RANGER school. The true measure of a training program's effectiveness occurs during first contact with the enemy.