Sooo, getting back to the original topic of this thread, if the TSA at certain checkpoints is insisting on taking out ALL electronics from our bags, seems like your statement here is a contradiction. :confused:

Any other reports of this TSA policy?
 

Nothing out of the ordinary at ATL security yesterday.

Early Sept checking in at UA in SEA there were signs at the UA counter about "all electronics out" but at the Xray it was limited to DVD players and video cameras. The confusion didn't help.

Many of the procedures come from politics, CYA, and knee-jerk. Very little comes from actual intel.

You may wish that we are all good little sheep, and that we conform to your agency's idea of the "norm", but if we're truly protecting the freedoms under the Constitution then there has to be room for personal expression.

Oh, wait, maybe you think this is the way it should be:

Link

Just like there are good policies and bad policies, there are good screeners and bad screeners. Bart is an example of one of the good ones. I have numerous examples of the bad ones.

I don't think you really mean what you say. The Internet is not pax and therefore does not present itself to you, angrily or otherwise.

I infer, however, that it's your impression that some pax have become steeled against screeners due Internet forums such as this? I doubt that many of those angry pax you've encountered are visitors to Flyertalk or another meeting point on the Internet for frequent fliers. Flyertalk has a relative lot of Internet traffic, but it's still off the radar for most of the traveling public.

IOW, !TSA NP!, couldn't it just be the case that the increased (and often unpleasant) scrutiny of one's body and possessions at airport c/ps simply are irritants in themselves, in the opinion of many travelers?

Prima facie friendly and cooperative, perhaps. Most people reflexively present such an affect towards those in real or even questionable authority. It's natural to act that way when you have to give up something to get something back. The higher the stakes, the firmer the game face. The money and energy invested in preparing for a smooth flight these days is not inconsiderable. If that weren't true, then the mere posting of "Do you want to fly today?" would not drip so heavily with implication.

The opportunity cost of not going along with the TSA's flow is significant also because the transaction entails all sorts explicit and tacit contracts among three primary parties (at least) -- pax, airline, federal security agency -- whose interests overlap and conflict.

But let's suppose for the sake of discussion that indeed "[t]he average passenger is friendly and at the very least cooperative." I'd venture a guess that the Facebook Factor (as I like to call it) is far more in play here than most realize. I'm referring to those (of whatever age) who think nothing of posting pages and pages of personal info about themselves on the Web with little regard for unfortunate consequences. And what I'm further suggesting is that they have probably not given much thought to whether there's a corollary between the virtual vomiting of personal information in the websphere and the mindset that individuals are not entitled to retain control of their identifying information. After all, "[i]f you have nothing to hide, what's the harm in giving it [to Person X] upon request?" is nearly impossible to respond to extemporaneously without at least a hint of defensiveness.

Six-plus years ago, who could have imagined that what was once a mere act of revenue protection on the part of the airlines would be copied and then co-opted as a federal act -- of SSI import! -- for the purpose of national security? Six-plus years ago, would could have even dreamed that Flyertalk would be littered with dozens of threads seriously arguing over propositions such as: "If you're really not a terrorist, then you'll show the nice agent your ID and stop holding up the line for the rest of us."

Insensitivity to the notion of personal privacy leaves one without a sensibility of guarding one's identity. Not knowing why ID is requested in any given context, for what purpose and by whom leaves one vulnerable to the whims of whatever random assertion of authority they come up against, harmless intentions or not. Presenting ID has become so reflexive a habit in the last six years or so that, for some, they actually think it's "illegal" (or at least unwise) to walk around outside their homes without it. It's no wonder they have no basis to measure whether what the TSA says about ID is actually true let alone rational.


Assuming that private security's mandate was to thwart hijackings-in-progress.

But that wasn't part of their mandate that day, was it? And, of course, how could it have been? Security screeners are no more prescient than any other individual in detecting the thoughts and intentions on the minds of those who pass before them every day.

Your implication (in the quote above) is that some posting here think that c/p security screeners were somehow responsible for failing to detect the thoughts and intent of a certain 20 criminal minds on 9/11. So, I guess I'm curious to know, why did you pose the question as you did?

All that can be reasonably asked of c/p screeners is to prevent credible threats -- weapons, explosives -- from being carried on board.

All the statutory reach in the world can be written into law .... but to what purposeful end? (And at what opportunity cost? Can anyone claim with certainty the that current practice of SPOT would have deterred any of the 20 hijackers? Did the lighter ban save us of from any harm?) Once the cabin door is shut, it's the crew (and us, if choose to defend ourselves) against those whose intent is to do harm.

In case you've not spent much time reading through the forum archives, !TSA No Play!, here's the summary analysis about what helped cause or didn't help cause the tragedy on 9/11. Does this seem sensible to you:
Now, do you really believe that mere box-cutters did the trick?


Why do you assume that we've not been in contact with elected officials?

And are you saying, "there's only so much" you can do or are actually willing to do?


Who in the thread has suggested this? Please don't put words into others' mouths and then deride them for "their" logic.


The MMW goes beyond dislike. It crosses the line of decency and credulity.


I'm baffled by something, !TSA NP!. Is there any empathy possible towards FTers despite that some of their concerns may be inimical or threatening to the existence of the agency your work for? Is it not possible that their reasons for blowing off steam are legitmate? Has it occurred to you that the very reason for this forum's existence is to share news, discuss personal observations *and* blow off steam about a part of the travel experience that bothers us?

If all we're really accomplishing, IYO, is blowing off steam, then why waste your time on such a boring discussion? Methinks you know perfectly well that there's a lot more to the discussion than a 5-second stake in steam venting. @:-)


Check.

Checks written, and check.

Why does the "We're-all-in-this-together" appeal rarely fail to come up in these discussions? Oh yeah ...

Because we've run out of arguments. ("Reasoning is hard!")

So, just abdicate one's higher faculties to the herd instinct? Can't we all just get along™? (Thanks, but I'll pass.)

Thanks for the reminder. @:-)

In ten years, when I've earned a BA from a top school and a JD from Harvard, and I'm going to London to close a multi-billion-dollar deal for my investment banking client, and I'm making $250k a year fresh out of Law School because I actually have a brain and I worked my ... off for those credentials (i.e. I've actually done something with my life, like going to college, getting a real job, and going to law school), I appreciate not being treated like ..... I will obviously do my job to the best of my ability, with class and professionalism, and take ownership of it, and I ask, check that, I DEMAND that everyone else I encounter do the same. Anyone who does not do their job to the best of their ability, with class and professionalism, and take ownership of their work is, and will always be, the scum of the earth, or the lowest form of life on earth, or the most despicable thing on the planet, take your pick.

Taking ownership of your work means that admitting to having made a mistake when appropriate. I don't see anyone from TSA doing that, nor do I see anyone from TSA doing their job to the best of their ability, and most people from TSA, from the front line screener to Kip Hawley and Chertoff, act with neither class nor professionalism. Had they been working for a private company they would have been fired a long time ago.

^^^

Accountability and responsibility - two attributes sorely lacking at TSA.

(Gee - I'm agreeing with an attorney. This truly is a strange forum. :D)

TSA doesn't check IDs, just go through the motion. Never once have I've been question about the old photo ID which barely looks like me. Rarely do they even look up at me when they make the incomprehensible squiggles. My paper temporary DL didn't even get a bat of the eye. (I could have made it at home.)

Many TSOs are great, especially at PDX. But the Gestapo treatment at many others leaves much to be desired.

I flew SEA->SMF->SEA yesterday and only was asked to take the laptop out of my bag (I had two phones, and iPod and various cable in my bag which never came out).

You seem like a determined individual, and I wish you the best...

...however, I have never met an attorney in my life to earn a quarter million fresh out of law school, and this includes Harvard alumni with billionaire clients that get hired in "expensive" cities. ;) And with 8 attorneys in my immediate family (we're hispanic... and catholic, and live to THAT stereotype), it's not hard to find a new attorney to compare.

But I do expect you to make your first million by the time you're 32 with this kind of mindset, and to be laughing about this post beforehand :D

Any interaction with a security force can only have a neutral or negative outcome for the civilians immediately involved.

I believe that was the genesis of the "snake" comment. The TSA, by its own admission, is an unpredictable element in travel.

By design, I cannot tell from trip to trip what I will encounter at an airport checkpoint.

I carry more than $15K in photo gear, computer equipment, and assorted weird electronics on almost every trip.

Keeping track of this as it goes out of my sight, knowing that there are criminal pax and (far fewer) criminal screeners who would love to dip into the toys-on-parade does generate a bit of stress.

The "barkers", first time travelers, and unfortunately all-too-often incompetent screeners just add to the unpredictability of the checkpoint.

So, I like snakes. I have no fear of snakes. Even poisonous snakes are cool. However I know that every encounter with one can only have a neutral or negative outcome.

Going through the LAX elite line, yesterday, "barker" was saying to take out all "large" electronics -- laptops, cameras, CD players, etc.

My two carry-ons were crammed with electronics -- my laptop, two digital still cameras, a digital camcorder, and all manner of support electronics, as well as an MD recorder, my Blackberry, three cellphones and, of course, my Bose NC phones and an iPod. I wasn't about to empty my "large" electronics in the bins, particularly my cameras which get held up to my face (think about it -- shoes walk on the ground, shoes go in the bin, what was on the ground gets transferred to the bin, etc.)

I took out the laptop and left everything else in the bags. One bag got pulled for secondary. The screener was polite, as was I. I asked him to change his gloves, which he did. He did a short inspection, ran a couple of swabs and wished me a nice day, which I returned.

Because this was the elite line, I don't know what was happening with the Kettles and the Gomers.

Wachtell's up to $235k already with bonus, so some are pretty damn close.

If you take that law degree into banking, $250k's entirely doable.

You must've been napping .... he's not taken the bar exam just yet. Go back to sleep. ;)

He did say this was all 10 years down the line. @:-) And what with all the inflation-mongering these days, six-figures in U.S. pesos may well be doable by then. :D

Just ribbing you a little bit, stupidhead. :)

sheeezz!

any chance we can merge all this crap into a "TSA is Evil / no we're not" thread so those of us looking for useful travel info dont have to sift through this crap?

I just want to know what to expect in MIA next week and could give a RA less about anything else ...

You've got a point, muddy. I'll give you that. @:-)