What Is The Answer
#1
Original Poster



Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: SAN
Posts: 6,226
What Is The Answer
I don't fly a great deal. Probably average between 10-15k miles a year.
I have serious concerns about government intrusion where it doesn't belong. Although, I suppose a case could be made that the federal government does have a legitimate/constitutional role to play in airline safety due to interstate commerce and border control issues.
I'm just curious as to what the folks here think will really work. What procedures and policies need to be in place to provide security without being unconstitutional on the one hand or just plain dumb on the other?
If this has already been hashed out feel free to point me to the appropriate thread.
Thanks.
CV
I have serious concerns about government intrusion where it doesn't belong. Although, I suppose a case could be made that the federal government does have a legitimate/constitutional role to play in airline safety due to interstate commerce and border control issues.
I'm just curious as to what the folks here think will really work. What procedures and policies need to be in place to provide security without being unconstitutional on the one hand or just plain dumb on the other?
If this has already been hashed out feel free to point me to the appropriate thread.
Thanks.
CV
#2
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: SW Rapid Rewards, Hilton Honors, Marriott, Avis First
Posts: 4,831
Revert everything back to the way it was on September 10, 2001, with two exceptions:
1. Secure the cockpit doors like they are today.
2. Have a policy of never giving in to hijackers' demands.
1. Secure the cockpit doors like they are today.
2. Have a policy of never giving in to hijackers' demands.
#3


Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 2,422
There have been a lot of threads here with frequent travelers' "wish lists" or "top 10" recommendations for TSA reform.
Many have called for the dissolution of the TSA. But I think that the TSA mostly needs to take a "time out." No more new rules. No more drastic changes in screening technology. Stop. Conduct a brief and thoughtful assessment.
There is an increasing consensus that the focus needs to be on finding terrorists, not weapons. And that part of this focus means finding terrorist threats before they ever get to the airport. In other words, funding may need to be shunted away from the TSA to intelligence agencies.
My own recommendations:
1. Use common sense behavioral detection. No quotas, no absolute criteria for selection. See Malcolm Gladwell's piece discussing the reduced cost and increased effectiveness of "common sense" profiling for drug smugglers. It's reprinted in his new book, "What the Dog Saw."
2. Use full body x-ray as a secondary screening tool only. This waylays some privacy and radiation concerns, and reduces cost.
3. Use random screening with great caution. Focus efforts on getting it "right the first time." Gate screening, "patting down all men," "all laptop inspection day," etc. are such obvious charades that they annoy passengers, and exacerbate the TSA's reputation for incompetence.
4. Quietly reduce shoe inspections and liquid restrictions. The more items that are contraband, the harder it is to identify genuine threats. Again, there is no magic to this. Just common sense.
The teacher who is obsessed with banning chewing gum ("Is that GUM?") spends so much time looking for gum that he or she misses the kid with a messed-up family, psychiatric problems, and a shotgun. You're better off knowing the kids in your classroom than making a long list of rules.
5. Be nice. The "show of force" mentality is counterproductive, and creates unnecessary stress for travelers. There is no correlation between an authoritarian demeanor and improving air safety.
6. Recognize faults and adapt accordingly. The TSA has had embarrassment beyond embarrassment over the past month. Instead of saying, "there are no children on the selectee list," "the system worked," "it was that guy's fault for kissing his girlfriend," own up to your missteps and apologize to the passengers.
7. No quotas. No continuous secondary, "we have to screen 10% or 25% of this or that," or "we have to find at least one passenger by behavioral detection." Focus attention on identifying threats to air safety, not on meeting an arbitrary quota.
The screening steps should be:
1. Most airport security should be left to collaborative intelligence agencies so that terrorists never make it to the airport.
3. Reinforced flight deck doors.
3. A small, carefully controlled and coordinated no fly/selectee list, with quick redress options.
4. Checked baggage explosive testing with passenger/baggage reconciliation.
5. Friendly and conversational staff, fluent in English, who will enjoy work more and reduce passenger stress. This will simultaneously give them the opportunity to identify RARE instances of aberrant behavior.
6. Metal detector. Shoes on, but I agree with x-raying large coats that could conceal something.
7. X-ray of hand luggage using good quality x-ray equipment.
8. Explosive detection, full body x-ray (or pat-down) only for those passengers who have aroused suspicion, or for bags that appear unusual.
Many have called for the dissolution of the TSA. But I think that the TSA mostly needs to take a "time out." No more new rules. No more drastic changes in screening technology. Stop. Conduct a brief and thoughtful assessment.
There is an increasing consensus that the focus needs to be on finding terrorists, not weapons. And that part of this focus means finding terrorist threats before they ever get to the airport. In other words, funding may need to be shunted away from the TSA to intelligence agencies.
My own recommendations:
1. Use common sense behavioral detection. No quotas, no absolute criteria for selection. See Malcolm Gladwell's piece discussing the reduced cost and increased effectiveness of "common sense" profiling for drug smugglers. It's reprinted in his new book, "What the Dog Saw."
2. Use full body x-ray as a secondary screening tool only. This waylays some privacy and radiation concerns, and reduces cost.
3. Use random screening with great caution. Focus efforts on getting it "right the first time." Gate screening, "patting down all men," "all laptop inspection day," etc. are such obvious charades that they annoy passengers, and exacerbate the TSA's reputation for incompetence.
4. Quietly reduce shoe inspections and liquid restrictions. The more items that are contraband, the harder it is to identify genuine threats. Again, there is no magic to this. Just common sense.
The teacher who is obsessed with banning chewing gum ("Is that GUM?") spends so much time looking for gum that he or she misses the kid with a messed-up family, psychiatric problems, and a shotgun. You're better off knowing the kids in your classroom than making a long list of rules.
5. Be nice. The "show of force" mentality is counterproductive, and creates unnecessary stress for travelers. There is no correlation between an authoritarian demeanor and improving air safety.
6. Recognize faults and adapt accordingly. The TSA has had embarrassment beyond embarrassment over the past month. Instead of saying, "there are no children on the selectee list," "the system worked," "it was that guy's fault for kissing his girlfriend," own up to your missteps and apologize to the passengers.
7. No quotas. No continuous secondary, "we have to screen 10% or 25% of this or that," or "we have to find at least one passenger by behavioral detection." Focus attention on identifying threats to air safety, not on meeting an arbitrary quota.
The screening steps should be:
1. Most airport security should be left to collaborative intelligence agencies so that terrorists never make it to the airport.
3. Reinforced flight deck doors.
3. A small, carefully controlled and coordinated no fly/selectee list, with quick redress options.
4. Checked baggage explosive testing with passenger/baggage reconciliation.
5. Friendly and conversational staff, fluent in English, who will enjoy work more and reduce passenger stress. This will simultaneously give them the opportunity to identify RARE instances of aberrant behavior.
6. Metal detector. Shoes on, but I agree with x-raying large coats that could conceal something.
7. X-ray of hand luggage using good quality x-ray equipment.
8. Explosive detection, full body x-ray (or pat-down) only for those passengers who have aroused suspicion, or for bags that appear unusual.

