ummm
 

COS comes up to DEN but its not for the reason that you posted.

Right.. It's that artificial "shortage" of screeners that is created by the pinko in charge of "security" at DEN's little perverted Shoecapades. ;)

Supporting overtime and extra expenses for COS screeners ain't cheap, either.

^ ^

Exactly why I have long posted that it is time (long overdue, actually) that the agency be disbanded, its employees be fired and its leadership be imprisoned.

Perhaps it will happen someday. :)

nope
 

COS comes up here because we are training too many people for our trainers to handle.

I know all of that. The fact of the matter is, you do not know whether someone with a badge is boarding a plane or not. Whether they are or not, what stops them from giving their shoes, if there is indeed osmething in them, to a passenger who is deemed "screened?"

Government background checks mean little. Look at Tim McVeigh, Jonathan Pollard and Robert Hanssen.

Is that over the top? Yes it is, but your agency likes to portray itself as doing everything they can in the name of "security," and if you feel necessary to have everyone else take off their shoes, why not the employees? Isn't that an added measure of security?


How much more confusion can be added? Security is not consistent from airport to airport, let alone at DEN itself.


Really? Then why was I handed an orange laminated card at ALB to indicate what I was there for? By the way, that SSSS didn't even involve taking off my shoes.


Funny thing is, us passengers ever get a real answer from the TSA.


If someone comes into the emergency room with a gunshot wound to the leg, do you check their teeth for plaque? Again, I'm just pointing out your condractions of unnecessarily holding up the line vs. holding everything else up.

The item that is beig refused to be removed are the SHOES. Look at the SHOES. There is not reason someone should be groped because of their SHOES.

No it is not, but your agency executes the task poorly. WTMDs are set at different settings at different airports, and even ones within DEN itself. If some moron like me can figure out which WTMDs will ring at DEN and other airports, don't you think the bad guys would figure this out as well? They tend to scope things out...just ask James Woods.

I live in Denver, I know exactly what your shoe policy is. It is not "some" screeners, but all of them. It is not enforcing the shoe policy "tightly," but rather giving a false sense of secuirty to people when your policies clearly have significant gaps in them.


No, I have traveled enough to learn which AIRPORTS, not individual screeners, have the shoe fetish. DEN, SEA and SMF are the ones that have the consistent "policy." Only once since 9/11, in about 20 European trips I have taken, was I required to remove my shoes for a US-bound flight. Even an airport like LHR, which is probably the most coveted terrorist airport target doesn't require shoe removal. Heck, they don't even want me to take my computer out of my bag. What is LHR doing right that the TSA is failing to see?

I know you guys haven't found another shoe bomber. Your agency loves to take credit if some idiot decides to pass something through. The gun in the teddy bear at MCO a couple of years ago is a prime example.


The fact of the matter is, your agency has a larger reputation of removing things from bags more than protecting us.

argumental
 

It doesnt matter whether they are getting on a plane or not. They are by virtue of employment, allowed to wear shoes through the checkpoint.[quote]

None of these people had anything to do with aviation security. There is a cross section of people that can be "got to" with bribes, extortion etc. This would apply to airport employees also.

I cannot tell you why it is that way. I can only tell you that it is. Is this a hole, yes. Is it likely to be exploited? Probably not.



Inconsistancy and confusion are not the same thing.



Integrated lane operation is what we call it. I tend to only think of DEN when I post answers like that. The shoe issue is being addressed AGAIN.



????



The obvious answer is that I am not in the emergency department of a hospital. The issue of doing the whole secondary screening on people sent down for shoes is necessary to ensure nothing is overlooked. We do the secondary screening procedure the same on all the people.

Asked and answered.


This is not true. The WTMD are set to the same standard detection thresholds at all airports and are not changed. DEN and I am sure some other airports have had issues with vibration. The antennas got phase adjusted on some of the wtmd in order to not false alarm at a vibration. This makes them seem more sensitive. I can assure you that they will all detect the minimum amount of metal that they are supposed to.



Good for you! When are you coming out to DIA again? Ill chat with you. However, I dont believe that you can honestly say that you have seen all 900 screeners in action across all three checkpoints telling everyone to remove their shoes. Furthermore the false sense of security is in the eyes of the beholder. If you dont believe that it is good security, that doesnt mean that everyone does. If you are again referring to the employees having to take shoes off, I cannot help you. I am not aware as to the WHY of that rule. I can tell you though that it would create a delay for passengers.




I cant speak for London. Perhaps they are reactionary and wont do the shoe thing till something happens there. The US is trying to prevent a known exploit from occurring again.


Wow, a gun in a teddy bear and you are saying things like this? You are striking me as borderline hostile/irrational.


Not really, given the scope of the theft problem by baggage handlers before TSA took over VS the amount of prohibited things that are found at the checkpoints and in baggage. The sensationalism is on TSA because it is a federal agency and it is a security agency. Now that we are in the loop with the baggage handlers, there is another scapegoat in the mix. As in another post that is currently discussed on flyertalk, the theft problem is a mess. We have gotten sensational media exposure for some of the thefts that we are responsible for. This has given people a predisposition to blame us for all thefts. Words that come to mind, discrimination, predisposition, bias, prejudice etc. It really isnt fair.

The way we're going, you're more likely to end up in prison for having an opinion that goes against "the Party" than they are.

When we show favoritism and have loopholes, that's what the bad guys will exploit. On 9/11, the bad guys were permitted to carry such small weapons, as allowed by the FAA then.

We simply have another loophole that needs to be closed. Is it really that irrational to have an employee take off their shoes? If timing is a genuine concern, then why default to all passengers having to remove shoes?

If your answer to the last question if security is paramount, then I refer back to the first question about why not have the employees remove the shoes?


That has always been my point, if airport employees can be "got to," doesn't it make sense to screen their shoes and make them go through everything passengers are subject to?


If we are going on "probably nots," then why are four year-old kids and 88 year-old grandmothers going into secondary?



You're right. But it is inconsistency that LEADS to confusion.



But that goes directly against your claim about being the most efficient when it comes to time. Again, people should not be groped because they don't want to take their shoes off.


I am telling you it is the case. I walked through the Concourse A entrance on Saturday with my belt buckle. I assure you this is the same belt that gets set off in some lanes at DEN, but I know which ones it will not set off in DEN. In a previous string, you attributed it to the trains downstairs, which is clearly not the case since this happened in another part of the terminal.


What else can I say? I am basing my opinions mostly on what I experience personally. It is clear that EVERYTHING is not being done in the name of security. WTMD are set differently, I have inadvertently carried a Swiss Army knife in my bag that went undetected, there are stories in the news about college kids bringing stuff onto planes. I don't know what else to say.

The point here is that the US tends to do things just to appease the public, "eye candy" if you will, with not enough emphasis on the fundamental priniciple of your agency, which is security.

Thanks for the unsolicited psychoanalysis. Where did I talk about you personally?

The point here is that guns going through x-ray machines have been detected long before your agency's existence and your extra, unnecessary measures do not provide added security.


So the reports about your colleagues being arrested in other cities are sensationalized? It's all the media's fault, correct? Once your agency came into existence, baggage locks became a no-no and things started going bye-bye. Some of your colleagues have been arrested for theft. Don't you see any correlation there?

Stories have come out about your colleagues sending themselves through scanners, lifting items from both checked and carry-on bags. But alas, everyone at the TSA has had background checks, right? The same background checks as the employees who are not required to take off their shoes. This proves that mere background checks do not work and that there must be done in the name of aviation security. Does it really hurt to make the employees take off their shoes too?

okay
 

Like I said I dont know why they dont do it.




We dont know the background of the 88 year old or the 4 year old. Plus we dont want to get accused of age discrimination







I was there when they did the mags on A bridge. It was due to the trains. The trains hit all the checkpoints with vibrations.



Some things you are right about, some I dont have the answers to. Some you have no idea about. The media isnt at fault except that they make a big issue of the deals.

eyecue, you questioned the quote,"funny thing is,us passengers ever get a real answer from the T.S.A." when questing a T.S.a. person why he/she
did something, you either get no response or ' it is because of security. :rolleyes:

with flawed logic coming from some passengers who can't get past the "need" to check teddy bears (like the one that had the gun like eye stated) or granny's bag (another gun) it's a losing battle to try and strike any middleground. there are a lot of opinions on what specifics constitute the "right" way of doing things, be it from a standpoint of convenience or an ideological standpoint on civil liberties etc...

i would go as far as saying that the actual screeners care less about arguing a point with a passenger, and more about just doing the job.

eyecue correct me if i'm wrong.

actually
 

You are correct. There are very few arguments at the checkpoint. IT is mostly anger shown by the passenger. It is hard to tell if they are angry at themselves and misdirect it towards us or they are angry at us. We dont get right and wrong arguments either.THe instant that an anger issue starts then it is time to call in the supervisor.

Why on earth would passengers be angry at themselves ? :confused:
Using the true meaning of the word argument (expression and discussion of different opinions on a subject), I submit there are no arguments at the checkpoint, screeners merely invoke the 'S-word' and any constructive discussion ends forthwith. Reminds me of the Monty Python skit.

It's the job that is in dispute. I am all for checking the teddy bears and granny's bag, no question about it. The reason I originally brought up the teddy bear thing is because the TSA will call a press conference to showcase that.

If someone wants to bring in a supervisor when I argue with a TSA person, that's fine with me. I just know that I am likely to get someone who is more polished in being more robotic in their boilerplate answers, of course blaming other airports for doing things wrong. Deflecting blame to someone else, that's what society is all about today.