Security breach at DFW
 

The wondeful minimum wage pinheads messed up my travel tonight...
http://www.dallasnews.com/latestnews...t.46c0db1.html

Although not directly related, this incident reminds me of something I always wondered prior to 9/11: Why is there not a police officer stationed at every security checkpoint at every airport? The reason I bring this up now is that the only airport where I ever noticed this being standard procedure prior to 9/11 was Dallas Love Field - at every checkpoint, even the one just serving CO's 2 gates, there always was a uniformed member of the Dallas Police sitting there, along with the regular security people. If DAL could manage to do this, why can't other airports?

Especially post-9/11, why is this not possible? As for myself, I'd feel much safer seeing a member of the local police at each checkpoint, compared to federal security screeners lacking high school diplomas or even Barney Fife's in National Guard uniforms carrying M-16's.

posted this on delta board. is the marshall responsible in part or completely? he(she) should know that they check at the gate and wonder if it isn't done. perhaps it was the first trip? what do they teach in marshall school?

So let me get this straight, according to the article:

"Mr. Clabes said screeners forgot to call a public safety officer at a gate checkpoint. An FAA representative who saw the security lapse notified law enforcement."


Instead of immediately identifying him/herself to the marshall as an FAA representative, and asking him to wait a minute while they find a cop to verify his identity, an FAA "representative" watches a guy with a gun get past security, lets him walk away, allows an armed man to walk around a secure area while he/she gets on the phone to call someone? And has the entire terminal shut down as a consequence?

You've got to be kidding me.

SuperSlug: Exactly.

The air marshal and the "FAA representative" work for the SAME FEDERAL AGENCY. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

Is this a preview of the wonderful service we should expect once the TSA takes over the entire screening function? If so, the USPS will look customer-centric compared to the airport checkpoints.

Cigarman, do us all a favor and file a class action lawsuit against Argenbright, DFW, and the FAA. The only way to stop this insanity is to make them PAY.

------------------
"Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither." - Ben Franklin

Looks to me like the FAA guy screwed up by not taking immediate action. I am sure glad the government is taking this over.

I wouldn't assume that the FAA "representative" was anything more than an FAA employee not tasked w/ this responsibility. FAA employees are used all the time to test security by intentionally trying to get thru w/ weapons, etc. Those employees have no authority to challenge anything, just to walk through. I know someone who is such an employee.. airport security has nothing whatsoever to do w/ her job - they just pull her as a supervisor, put a gun in her purse, and send her thru the gate. So conceivably, the FAA person who witnessed this could have been almost a bystander.. in which case, they would have been inclined to go up their own chain of command rather than challenging the rent a cops at the security checkpoint?

svpii: I may be making way too many assumptions, but in my opinion, if the "FAA representative" is not tasked with the responsibility of identifying the sky marshals (since they are both employed by the FAA), then something is seriously screwed up within the FAA.

The FAA rep. did not need to challenge the rent-a-cops at the checkpoint, they need to help verify the identity of a FELLOW FAA EMPLOYEE. If they are not allowed to do this, then changes need to be made to the system.

Bureaucrats obsessed with "following the chain of command" are not what we need. Such behavior will overtax my patriotic patience in a real hurry.

Hypothetical:

You are not armed and have no body armor but you are an FAA employee. You have no radio or police backup within sight. I would like you to go verify the identity of an *armed* man who you *know* is carrying a pistol. Be advised, that if he is NOT who he says he is, then he is very possibly an EXTREMELY lethal threat.

No offense, but I'd have pretty strong reservations about doing any such thing, and I've physically taken down armed people before. If you expect some non-combatant, non hand-to-hand trained FAA line personnel to do this you're asking an awful lot. The response was slow in coming, but the decision NOT to confront directly was, in my view, probably the correct one.

What really needs to change is the speed of reaction. We have to get away from a beareaucratic response mentality (up the decision to someone else) and change it to a damage control mentality. React, Contain, Deal with. What needs to be worked on is the ability to have a working panic button "all stop" system (with accountability for accidents etc), and the ability to reset fairly quickly. That keeps it from getting to the point where people are already on planes.

An analogy: Think about a security checkpoint as a pebble, then think about the expanded airport area as the ripples in a pnd from a dropped pebble. As time goes on the circle become wider. Right now, we have to figure the maximum distance a person can travel and increase the control area by that much per second. So rather than evacuating the whole airport, you simply stop further progression at a break point some distance in from the security point.

You hold everyone at the area where they are and walk the dog through. If the weapon is handed off, dropped or concealed the dog will find it. If not, you can back *those* people up back to security (or set up a provisional CP at that area and clear them out and closer to the gates).

This is one possible solution and not a complete one, but you get the idea. We're treating each breach like a four alarm blaze, instead of a brush fire. We need to stop doing that, and start using escalation techniques.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

[This message has been edited by Bouncer (edited 02-08-2002).]

Much better said than my attempt!

I'm thinking of my friend, an FAA supervisor who is responsible for some kind of runway equipment.. no training in anything remotely aimed at this situation. She's going to walk up to some guy w/ a gun and detain him??

That being said, I don't know really from reading the article what the FAA staffer did, in fact, do. I'm just making the point that I don't think it was necessarily his/her responsibility to correct this siutation on the spot.

Dupe post cuz I'm a goof. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif -B-

[This message has been edited by Bouncer (edited 02-08-2002).]

Bouncer, nice thoughts. But there are 2 people with MACHINE GUNS at each checkpoint. So the unarmed FAA grunt mearly needs to inform the HEAVILY ARMED people there for exactly that purpose. I say, nothing more than pinheads not following paperwork. AND REMEMBER, they knew it was a skymarshall NOT a terrorist when they cleared the terminal. I was there. They told us it was a skymarshal. I only found out later the stupidity of the not signing the log junk.

[This message has been edited by cigarman (edited 02-08-2002).]

I just find it not that likely that the FAA person just blithely let the Marshal walk past the Nat Guard, ignored everyone and then went wandering off in search of a trooper. It doesn't make sense on it's face.

Of more concern is how multiple Security people (cause I guarantee you there's more than one working the checkpoint) forgot a mainline procedure.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

cigarman: EXACTLY. Every checkpoint I've been through in the last four months has been teeming with Armed soldiers. What's to fear?

Bouncer: I didn't say the FAA representative was at fault for not "challenging" the intruder; the whole point of my post is that the federal government is already running a screwed-up system if positive ID of one of their elite (sky marshal) depends on some local Barney Fife and not a fellow FAA EMPLOYEE.

I don't necessarily fault the vulnerable and defenseless FAA rep., I want to know why the poor FAA rep is so defenseless and, more importantly, whether the TSA will change any of that nonsense next week or in November or at least if they're planning to improve it sometime in the future. Keystone Kops antics like these (of course it's Argenbright's fault) make for great newscasts but they convey the impression that even our vaulted federal officials have their thumbs up their &%@.