All this unjustified patting seem to be more to impress and reassure other passengers.

I did not set off the detector, nor the wand - do not wear nor carry anyhing with metal, yet was patted down and when i said that i did not like being touched the female agent called a National Guard
(I was still complying just letting her know how unpleasant the situation was) and was told that i would be "taken away" if i refused to which i pointed out i was complying just not enjoying the experience.

I was made to remove my shoes, walk back thru the metal detector barefoot , put the shoes on the belt and back steps again still barefoot - degrading and disgusting.

No paper slippers like in the hospitals..filthy!

I was pulled again out of the line before boarding the plane in business class and with a boarding pass showing 50k status and wanded again.

By the way. I wear thin travel clothes without pocket where it would be hard to conceal anything

This was the 3rd time in a 4 week period.. I'am 5'4 petite woman

San Francisco airport

Papotage

Hmmm...I'm curious, because I was recently traveling to Peru due to a death in the family with my mother. She's in her mid-50s and we were flying on two coach class FF tickets.

She was pulled for a more thorough search (while I was not) and after we boarded the plane she stated that it had seemed odd to her that a) she needed to submit to the extra search. b) that all the people submitting to extra searches were female (whether this is factual or perception I don't know).

My questions are the following:

1) What is the criteria used to select passengers for extra screening?

I ask this because after that flight I started looking more closely at the preboarding calls and I've noticed there is a tendency for the calls to come for people sitting in the last rows of the plane.

Coming back from OGG the 23rd it seemed all of them had infants (or at least 90% of them).

2) What are our rights or privileges in contesting or reporting what we feel are abuses in the system?

3) Is there actually any sense in doing these searches (especially if the are restricted to coach passengers as these usually are)?

4) Since FFs seem to be excepted from this procedure, is there any way we can get our traveling companions excepted as well? (I can hear the howls already)

You see I'm an elite member of AA, PLT to be exact, and my boarding passes were printed with a *CLR*, my mother's was not. After two days of not shaving and being pretty tired from being out the night before, I looked far more like the terrorist type than my dear mother (and with the laptop, mp3 player, phone, Blackberry, Visor PDA and air power adapter...well, come on, I should set off alarms across three airports.

4) Is there a consensus here regarding whether these procedures really work? Or are they just like the nail clippers and corkscrews? A joke?

Please forgive the lengthy post, thanks for your response.

Flake.

------------------
Travel light, travel cheap, travel often

My wife was "excessively probed" in Zurich by a security guard in an enclosed booth like a voting booth.

In Zurich the screeners who do the pat downs are all same sex as the passengers they check. They are all also older folkers. Eash person gets a minimum seach and there's no complaining about it....look at Zurich's safety record.

Oh, you were talking about airport security screeners.

I thought you were talking about FT board monitors.


Phew!

Effective immediately: No one will be allowed to wear clothes or carry anything beyond security. Screaners will all be members of AANR (American Assoociation of Nude Recreation)

[This message has been edited by mikey1003 (edited 12-02-2001).]

Unfortunately, there are only a few criteria at this point so searching is *supposedly* random.

What I've noticed though, is that they tend to try and search people with last minute tickets or generally who are umm.. more petite or feminine, and thus (apparently) easier to get to submit to the procedure. (hey, don't blame me, I'm just reporting observation, not making social commentary)

Think I'm lying? Consider how many older women are being searched or women with children, or young women. As opposed to big burly footbal player lookalikes like myself.

You think that's a coincidence?

Next time you fly, watch who they pick.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

Anyone watch 60 minutes tonight?
It TICKED ME OFF!
Our idiotic Transportation Secretary saying that little old 80 year old women should be searched with exactly the same frequency as young male muslim arabs. I know it's a touchy subject, and I do NOT advocate racial profiling where the potential crime is not tied to the race of the potential suspects.... BUT... Let's be realistic.

Bouncer.....I'm 6'2" and around 285(not exactly small)....and I was pulled aside and searched today...no changes in my tix...I'm CO PLAT with over 100 seg's this year and 145K miles flown....why me????????

I saw a guy in EWR get the "open your belt" bit today and he was a bit surprised they'd ask that. Also, if there's a bulge in your pocket they weren't letting it through, even if you didn't set off the metal detector. So you had to dump wallets and anything else in pockets on the belt. They should have at least had a sign to that effect & put more plastic baskets out, but those are minor things. I thought maybe they'd had a specific threat.

originally by aflyer:

In the 'olden days' when I was a lad flying back and forth from England to Ireland, Nuns and Priests were routinely 'not interfered with' by security - why should they be, they were Nuns and Priests, right?

Guess what guys, anyone can put on a black suit and a 'dog collar', or a habit.

Everyone should be equal under the present security guidelines - no more 'nodding' through just because you are there every week and they all know you - or I'm an EXP and therefore cannot be a risk.

It is interesting to note that a few weeks ago people complained about $7.00/hour security people being lax - now they are complaining becuse these same people seem to be trying to do a better job!

It's just like the airline food fiasco, everyone complained about it when it was offered, yet when it was taken away there was on outcry!!

None of us should consider that we are above scrutiny, thats how terrorism invades us.



------------------
I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous

Well, I really do think a little profiling is called for. Right now, the "random" gate search is not random at all. The first person at the gate gets hand-searched. Then as soon as he's through, the very next passenger is "randomly selected".

I've figured out this is why I never seem to get searched. I'm rarely one of the first to board, since I don't elbow my way to the front of the line or hover at the gate. So I usually don't get near the gate until the "random searches" are already underway.

Think how easy it would be to avoid being searched if you had a group of 5 or 6. Just make sure the first couple of people have clean records and carry no contraband. Then have them make the search take a long time by being uncooperative, make a fuss, etc... The screeners get all tied up and the other 3-4 people get waved through.

Profile and search...... It's better than searching a 70+ year old lady and waving the 20-something guy through.

I feel that the current security measures are more to provide passengers with the illusion of security. I think the rational is that if public sees all this searching, and guards, and security, then the public will feel safe and be willing to fly. I don't mind reasonable and fair security measures that provide a REAL security increase, but I do mind unreasonable or unfair measures that will not stop a planned security breach.

Here is what I feel should be the search criteria:

1) Everyone should be subject to the same level of search in order to enter a secure area. No random searches, no profiling.

2) Once inside the secure area, absent of probable cause, no further searches can be performed.

3) More intensive searching can only be done when there is just cause. Not randomly, and not by profile.

4) The searches must be for specific items and limited to areas those items may be contained.

5) If immediately available, the least invasive means of search must be used, such as use of scanning instead of hand searches.

6) Upon request, a person has a right to have searches performed in remote or private areas.

7) Searches must be for a reasonable threat and provide a real enhancement of security.

I have flown several times in the last 2 months. The last time, I had checked luggage on a no-notice ticket. Because of my same-day flight listing, I was automatically flagged to have both my checked and carry-on luggage searched.
Here is some of the detail:

1) Carry-ons searched by xray at security point, then hand searched at flight boarding point. Hand serached again at connecting flight boarding point.

2) Check bags hand searched. When checked bags are searched, all privacy is lost. Anything you may have is placed on dirty tables, by people with dirty hands, for all to see. And at the check-in counter, there are people in long, slow lines with nothing better to do than examine all of your person items. I saw them take dirty clothes out of plastic bags and place the clothes on the table. We already expect our privacy to be lost with are carry-ons, but now even checked luggage. And for what? bomb detection? I had a 16oz bottle of talc with me - they did not open or scan it. How much explosive powder could have been in there? And further, when I asked what they were looking for, the bag checker said, "bombs, weapons". But weapons(knives, firearms) are legal in checked bags! I believe that these bag checkers are not looking for explosives because they aren't looking in the places explosives would be and they probably can't recognize explosives without doing chemical testing. So, if they aren't looking for explosives, and weapons are legal, then what are the searching my bags for? Public illusion!

What are you all complaining about? Some of these patdowns sound like heaps of fun to me.

"Everyone should be equal under the present security guidelines - no more 'nodding' through just because you are there every week and they all know you - or I'm an EXP and therefore cannot be a risk."

Why?

What's wrong with Profiling? We already do it.

Step away from the idealism for a moment and into the practical. If everyone were TRULY equal we'd ALL get a thorough prison inmate style search. But we don't. In addition, the idea should be to do a *Threat Assessment* of passengers and not blindly search everyone. Blind searches do NOTHING to improve security but do cause passenger distress and more systemic issues.

This isn't about equality as regards to employment or anything else. It's about the physical security of aircraft. There's no commonality between the two. Trying to apply a constitutional "rights" protection to an aircraft is a misapplication.

And foreign nationals DO NOT come under the protection of the Constitution. If a young foreign national wishes to purchase a one way FC ticket then he (or she) should DEFINATELY come under more scrutiny then Mrs. Jenkins , a 77 year old former second grade school teacher travelling on a two month advance purchase economy ticket. We already DO profiling on flights from certain nations where drug trafficking is very problematic. We've been doing so for years. It is pound foolish to do otherwise.

So we are being foolish. And we need to stop.

It's not difficult to come up with a threat escalation scenario:

1) Under fifty years of age
2) foreign national/green card holder
3) Little or no luggage
4) Travelling alone or without family
5) Heavy accent
6) short notice ticket or cash ticket
7) Of probable Middle Eastern lineage.
8) source/destination a Middle Eastern country or country known to harbor/support terrorists.

And I'm sure other (better) identifiers could be added to the list. The point is, the more of these you meet the more likely you are to be searched. If you meet all eight you definately should be searched. And once cleared allowed to proceed without further delay. Just as the young men from South America are.

But you should NOT be bypassed in favor of a *random (not random)* search of a grandma travelling with an infant both of whom are from DesMoines. To do so is to destroy the point of searching at all.

Regards,
-Bouncer-