Bashing Air Marshals.
 

This is my first post here. So being the new person I will probably be viewed with some suspicion until I get to be known, in either a favorable or unfavorable light by others. I would hope that folks here can be adult about things and agree to disagree. Which from some of the posts I've read may not be easy. Having said that:

I have read several threads that outright just bash the Air Marshal's. Some here just call them thieves, sacks of ballast, say they are easy to spot, and they make it more dangerous to fly, since they are armed.

Instead of taking your complaints out on the individual FAM or the gate agent, why don't you do something about it? Like write a letter to your elected representatives. Write to the Director of the Federal Air Marshal Service. Write to Tom Ridge. Tell them how easy they are to spot. Tell them how the FAM's stick out with the short hair cuts, look like SWAT team members in suits, always sit in the same seats, are there when you get on and you get booted out of your "rightful" seat. Please do that. Because you will do the FAM's a big favor. They themselves are making the same arguments to their superiors. They want nothing more than to be able than to blend in. To not look like SWAT team members. To sit in different seats. Because they also know that if you see them, the folks that want to harm the airlines, hijack airplanes and crash them also can see them. If you have been paying any attention to the news you would know this. It's their management (and the industry itself also has some input) that tells them how to dress, how to look, where to sit, how to board the airplane. If they were truly undercover, as they should be, you would never know they were next to you. The FAMS is run by a bunch of former Secret Service managers. How well does the Secret Service blend in? There's nothing secret about them. If you want to read articles about it, I would be glad to post links. Or, you could just do a Google search and find the info yourself like I have.

If you honestly believe that the individual guy in the seat took it to deprive you of something or make you mad, you have issues. Most of the men and women who took the job didn't take it so they could get free upgrades to first class on flights they don't choose to fly on. They don't just walk up to the ticket counter and say "I want to go to BFE today. Oh yea, and while your at it, throw Spiff and FWAA out of their seats so we can sit there." They took the job because they don't want to see another day like 9/11. It's not so they can get the deli plate or cold salmon platter with pasta salad garnish or to have the comfy chair.

I have lost my seat upgrade a couple times. I got mad at first. Then I realized they are there to protect the public, and I got my upgrade the next time I flew. Do like I did, write to your elected officials about what you saw. After reading the articles I felt it was the right thing to do.

Here are a couple links about their "dress code" (There are more out there).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5592651/

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/15/na...5CND-MARS.html

So please, rather than say you're going to "out" the guy next time you don't get your frequent flyer upgrade, write a letter to someone. Tell them your experience or observations. Just try not to whine about it as you write. It's not personal on the part of the man or woman in the seat, so don't take it as such.

I don't understand your logic. So you'd rather the folks that want to harm the airlines, etc... not see them, then attempt to do their dastardly deed and see what the FAM can do about it? I'd rather the FAM be seen as what he is and prevent the occurence on the flight. Sort of like a cop running radar looking for speeders, seeing him causes us to slow down.
Nice attempt, but not very sensible as far as I'm concerned.

BTW, welcome to flyertalk, and thank you for encouraging us to be peaceable!

Well in that case, they should all be uniformed so it is unambiguous. The current situation makes no sense from either point of view.

That is actually a decent question and shows you are thinking about the problem. There are a number of reasons it is preferable for the fams to blend in with the Pax. Because of the numbers involved, the fam program is a deterrent measure, not a preventive one. Logistically, the fams can only cover a small minority of flights per day, so it's a good idea not to let it be known which flights these are. If they were in uniform, it would be easy to avoid them and just go hijack another flight. Additionally, there are many tactical and operational reasons why the element of suprise is a good thing. In this scenario, it's bad juju for the enemy to know anything the good guys. So the insanity of allowing the fams to be profiled in the name of "professionalism" is self-evident, and it is clearly an unsafe policy.

Problem is, the people sitting around the sky marshals tend to be very frequent flyers. Once a year families to MCO don't tend to sit in the first several rows of most large jets - except on WN or other airlines without First Class. VVF tend to fly First because the airlines have structured their FFP to reward their frequent flyers by upgrading them.

Think those very frequent flyers can't spot the marshals? Guess again.

Marshals are the people who cause seat assignments to be changed, usually late in the game. Example: I choose 4B but I am switched to 5A with no explanation. A quick glance at 4B usually solves the big mystery.

Marshals are the guys (overwhelmingly male) who board first and are already seated when I board (I am often the very first non-employee/non-marshal passenger to board due to VFF status).

Marshals never drink alcohol and generally don't sleep.

Marshals never (in my experience) pull out a laptop and work or play games like most other business or leisure travelers.

Marshals tend to be young (max age was 37, now 40 unless one was already a federal cop) and sport the buzz cut so popular with deputy sheriffs, FBI agents and border patrol agents. They look like cops. This characteristic can be changed, but the buzz cuts aren't forced on the agents right now, as cops tend to like the near-skinhead look.

Marshals tend to wear clothing to conceal a couple of firearms, like long pants and jackets, even when everyone else is much more casual. The jackets have to stay on if you want to keep the holsters concealed.

That all ignores the other obvious giveaways, like the times they show their credentials to gate agents, checkpoint workers, etc.

Marshals tend not to chat up their seatmates, unlike nearly every boor in First Class.

Marshals tend to pay inordinate attention/scrutinize each passenger who gets up to use the restroom (usually adjacent to the flight deck). The attention may be warranted, but the manner of surveillance gives the marshals away.

To sum it up, if non-terrorist very frequent flyers can spot the sky marshals, so can terrorists (if they fly enough - which wouldn't be too hard with air fares so low these days).

So the charade of anonymity only works if the audience consists of dense people or the once a year flying family to DisneyWorld.

If one passenger knows who you are, your cover is blown.

Either work on keeping your identity a secret or wear uniforms and sit outside the flight deck like prison guards. But enough with the "be nice to us, cause we're federal agents" routine.

Me thinks you're preaching to the choir here. They readily admit they are too easily profiled, and it's a direct reflection of the inane policies they are forced to adhere to. I would imagine they don't care if you are nice to them or not. Just leave them alone if you don't like them.

Some people legitimately feel that the entire program is an inane waste of money and resources, and they are entitled to that opinion. Sacks of ballast? Perhaps.

My point is that changing their dress code or haircut isn't gonna make them invisible. That may change a couple of the clues, but it's always gonna be hard to hide a couple of federal agents in the First Class section of most airliners, no matter their hair or clothing.

How would you know? What does a federal agent look like when he travelling for personal reasons in regular clothes and is sitting in F? I would imagine that your gman radar is not as sharp as you think.

The first word in the response above is very key in my opinion. SOME people. They have their opinion, and yes it is legitimate, legitimate insofar as this is America and they are entitled to their opinion.

As I posted on another thread, I am an Federal Air Marshal, and as I said I am experienced and not worried about finding a job, just as the majority of my coworkers are. If the "Majority" of people in this country want the program "gone" , then thats the way it will be. My personal opinion is thats not the case.

As far as "bashing" individual Air Marshal's in lieu of the system in general, who is surprised. Anyone who is an employee of government finds themselves in this position, right or wrong. Most of the time wrong, sometimes right. This is even more prominent when talking about public safety officers. So I do not let it bother me one way or the other. "Ballast", well I have been called things that are not nearly so nice. I just chalk that up to what I said in this paragraph.

"Be nice to us cause we're Federal Agents"??? How about just not be a jerk. I don't expect any of the Freq. flyers to be "nice"...but how about a little manners? Like don't ask the questions that you know the answers to and try to catch us in a lie. Don't slam your seat back or slingshot mine. Don't shove your crap right past my face into your seat without a "excuse me". Take your bag off of your shoulder so you don't smack everyone else on the plane as you walk down the aisle to your precious first class seat.
Do I know you made me? Yes...I can tell by the look in your eye. Does that cause me to scrutinize every move you make if you pay me too much attention? Yes. Will that get you interviewed on the ground if you do silly things like leaping out of your seat to see my reaction...yes. All of these things are done daily by your "First Class Elite". Like I said before. FFers wonder why the F/As dislike them so much....Because they have no manners.
Like an old F/A once told me, " There are first class passengers...and there are passengers who occupy first class."
I try to be nice to everyone...until given a reason not to be.

With that said...
Be safe and be friendly
FAMIAM

MT6731,

You have asked why we don't just write to the policy makers to complain about how easy the FAMs are to spot. I just wanted to mention that the media attention to the problem of non-anonymous FAMs has been and will be influential to the policy makers. If there's a story in USA Today telling passengers how to spot the FAM, then you can bet somebody's going to be chewing somebody out up in headquarters. And complaining on FT is indeed a way to influence travel journalists, many of whom hang out here hoping for leads on stories. So it is indeed a valid form of activism to point out problems with the FAM program on Flyertalk.

Most of us don't condone bashing individuals here; we only want to bash bad policy. The fact that the FAMs make themselves so amazingly obvious seems frightening and wrong. Many of us feel guns don't belong on planes. Why don't they just train the FAMs in jiu jitsu or something? Then it would be impossible for the bad guys to turn FAMs into a major security liability.
And yes, many of us who think the FAMs make us less safe by introducing weapons to the cabin are doubly insulted when the FAM's take away our confirmed seat assignments and service class upgrades.

I think you are missing part of the point here. The folks in the headquarters don't care about the media attention. If you read what they have to say, they tend to snub the rank and file. They say it's the FAM's imagination they are easy to spot. There are multiple articles on the subject. The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA) has tried to arbitrate, but it falls on deaf ears in the HQ. Complaining about the individual FAM in the seat does nothing but create hostility/resentment towards that individual. And he or she is just doing as they are told.

As too thier training, they are taught more than to just shoot. I think the emphasis on the weapons training is so that if they ever have to use it, they will be proficient with the weapon. But rest assured they are taught how to use hands on, unarmed control methods. Use of deadly force is always a last resort with any police agency.

Gradgirl said- Many of us feel guns don't belong on planes. Why don't they just train the FAMs in jiu jitsu or something? Then it would be impossible for the bad guys to turn FAMs into a major security liability.

*************

LOL!! Excuse me while I regain control of myself....

Man that was amusing. Thank you for the laughs.

You're blonde, aren't you?

Gradgirl, I think what migramine is less than delicately trying to say is that they would prefer not to bring a karate chop to a gunfight.