Replace the TSA... With what????
 

I've heard here and on other forums that the TSA should be eliminated. But what I don't understand is, with what do we replace it? Are people suggesting that giving airline security over to private firms is the right approach? In my mind, this would be an unmitigated disaster that would set us back by a decade. Reform the TSA? Absolutely! But replace it? I just don't get the argument.

What argument is there AGAINST having a federal agency that is responsible for airline security, versus putting it into the hands of private companies?

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. Lock down (physically rearchitect if need be) the cockpit so during flight no one gets in, no one gets out. Toilets and rest areas are included in this secure area. There must be no physical way to travel between cockpit and cabin while in flight (i.e. pilots enter via separate exterior door). It's awfully hard to take over a plane if the cockpit can't be compromised. This requires training of pilots to understand that preventative losses are acceptable losses. Second, each plane should have a dual-key activated defensive system to knock out people in the main cabin (via oxygen decreasing or some chemical agent or some other solution) which requires both pilot and the relevant authority on the ground (military? FBI?) to activate.

In the long run it will be cheaper than the security theatre of late, and more effective.

Put simply, there are two:

(1) The same sorts of arguments that people give against the government performing any function that can be done by private companies, most recently the issues discussed about the so-called "public option" in the health insurance debate.

(2) Constitutional questions that arise when an agent of the government is searching people or saying whether people can fly or not.

At this point, I'm thinking DoD will do a better job then DHS.

Bolding above mine. Why? Why would this be an 'unmitigated disaster'? How would we be set back a decade?

You seem to be implying that they only thing that has prevented a repeat of the hijackings in Sept '01 is the TSA? If that is the case I'll ask you the same question that has been asked, repeatedly, of our self-proclaimed TSAers on this board-what is the 1 policy or procedure, instituted soley by the TSA, that had it been in effect on 9/10/10 would have prevented the hijackings that took place the next day? Just 1 & your answer can't include anything done by the airlines or the FAA.

Don't worry if you can't answer that-the self-proclaimed TSAers haven't been able to, either.

Do you know why? That's because nothing the TSA has done would have prevented the hijackings.

Not. One. Thing.

The hijackings suceeded because 4 pilots, following company policy at the time, cooperated w/the hijackers, allowing the hijackers to not only gain entry to the flight deck, but also control of the planes. Airline policy now states the door remains locked no matter what is going on in the cabin & the plane lands as soon as possible.

THAT is what will prevent future hijackings, not the TSA's War on Water, Shoe Carnivals, or the Nude-O-Scopes.

What most of us have advocated for is a return to sanity (w/all due respect to Messers Stewart & Colbert) when it comes to aviation security. Keep the federal oversight, but lose the theater. There are already airports that have contracted out checkpoint security & dumped the TSA (SFO comes to mind). Expand that model but w/real accountability for both the gov't agency providing the oversight as well as the front-line contractors.

+1

We have a known shipper program that puts who knows what into the belly of the plane, yet a known traveler gets strip-searched. I am an f'n known shipper yet I am subjected to pat-downs on the same plane my cargo rides uninspected.

TSA is a secret agenda. It is not what you think.

:td:Given that the contracted security like 'Team SFO' are doing exactly what TSA tells them to, they may as well still be TSA.

Roll back checkpoint screening to pre 9/11 standards and set up.
Increase cargo screening.
Maintain current cockpit/airline measures.
Remove TSA.
Oversight by FAA.

The useful TSOs will be retained by contract security companies. The useless ones will either go back to the fast food counters, the unemployment line or be sent to prison.

Amen!
 

Amen and amen!

The "known shipper" program is akin to locking your home's windows at night and then leaving the front door swinging open in the breeze with a sign in the yard that says, "C'mon in boys! The silver's in the first drawer on your right!"

It is pure insanity.

Rose

During true high alert times, simply put a visible armed LEO on every flight... or at every gate.

When the high alert has passed, have them patrol the area similar to how they would at a stadium, mall or other area where people congregate.

Eliminate the baggage screening charades unless there is a credible threat and the LEO's have a lead as to what kind of form it may take.

If you haven't noticed, over the last 5 years or so, almost all of the TSA initiatives have been focused on explosives. The Great Pointy Object Search is a thing of the past. Nail clippers and corkscrews are now allowed.

Puffers, swabbing, laptops out, the shoe carnival, the liquid restrictions, and the full body scanners are all designed to prevent someone blowing up the plane, not designed to take over the plane. Because as others noted here, the combination of the reinforced cockpit door and the post-911 policy change (no pilot will ever willingly give up control) mean that the cockpits are already secure enough.

As much as I dislike the TSA, it's not because of the front line. While there are plenty of anecdotes on this board about TSO power trips, for the most part, the folks manning the checkpoint do usually act in a professional manner. For me (and I'd guess most here), what bothers us about TSA is the policies that they set. The aforementioned shoe carnival, liquid rules, the pat downs, the millions spent on the wrong technologies, all the "theater" designed to make the public feel safe, rather than to make us actually safe.

So, yeah, we could replace the TSA screeners with private contractors as they used to be, and it might not make us any less or more safe. But even if it were private screeners, the rules and methods used would still be set by the government. If we abolish the TSA, then I assume it would be another federal agency. After all, the denizens of this board demand consistency.

What needs to change is how and why the rules get defined.

You haven't gone through security in SFO or MCI lately?

1) Government says we can't trust private contractors to do airport security
2) Government creates TSA so that we can have "high paid, federal workers" because we can trust them to do the job right
3) Billions of dollars spent to create, hire, train, etc. those "high paid, federal workers"
4) TSA goes out and contracts with private companies to provide security
5) TSA says its ok for them to use contractors because they will "supervise" them

Why couldn't we have just created an oversigt board/group/whatever to start with and saved billions of dollars?

Simple.

There was nothing the TSA does today that would have prevented 9/11.

The TSA did not mandate the end to the horrible policy of giving in to hijackers nor did they require that cockpit doors be reinforced. Those two things would have prevented 9/11.

Everything else the TSA does - including groping your 80-year-old grandmother's crotch to ensure she isn't an Al Qaeda operative - is security theater.

+100

Even though Kip Hawley liked to say that if TSA had been in place on 9/11, they would have stopped the threat :rolleyes:

Hmmm I'm not an anti government type but at least a private company would be subject to the will of the courts.

We could of course replace the TSA with the I can has cheeseburger kittens, save money, be just as effective and give travelers something cute to look at.

OP: as others have pointed out, your entire premise is faulty and flawed. Destroying the TSA, jailing its scumbag "leaders", and bringing back Argenbright and Globe will not be a disaster; it will be a victory for civil liberties and the people of this nation and our guests. Destroying TSA will be a blow to Al-Qaeda, for they will have lost their biggest ally in the war on freedom.

The TSA "leaders" are scumbags who have caused an unmitigated disaster and set back civil liberties by 6 decades: to cold war Eastern Europe. Let's correct that disaster ASAP.

The federal government should have absolutely no say in airport or aircraft security. There is no good reason for the federal government not to be punted off all airport property and all aircraft.

^^

Have each airline decide it's own security and let the customer choose whether they want to fly the airline with little security and perhaps more risk, or the airline with lots of security and maybe (or maybe not) less risk.

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

In thinking about it, I bet the could do it pretty easily. Hire enough people to be screeners, and get them up to speed with SOP, and make sure they understand they are accountable for their actions.

When the various checkpoints across the country close, the new screeners will come in to make sure things are setup properly. In the morning, the pax will interact with the new screeners..

As a private business would not a screening contractor have to face different liability and administrative search requirements than a government agency? The way I understand case law, and I am not nor do I pretend to be anything other than a novice observer, the administrative search that allows the current discretion requires a governmental agency to perform the such. Can they contract out this governmental function? A simple yes or no will suffice. I am not fishing, just asking.

The government only needs the Admin Search as an end run around the Constitution. A private business doesn't need this.

The airlines would just add it as a part of the contract of carriage that you must be screened to their standard to enter their terminal.

Yes, they can contract it out.

Even in the 70s, when all airport security was private, courts found that airport screening was part of a federal anti-hijacking effort and was an administrative search. U.S. v. Davis

Kip Hawley is a lying SOB. He knows damn well that TSA wouldn't have prevented 9/11.

My simple TSA deconstruction - eliminate the position of federalized TSO. Transfer the responsibility for airport security back to the Department of Transportation. DOT/FAA creates the position of Airport Security Director at every US airport, and gives this individual a small, professional staff to oversee the contractors who will be hired to perform the actual screening under rules promulgated by DOT/FAA, not the brown shirts in DHS.

We don't need to replace the TSA; it just needs to be run more efficiently without wasting taxes and still keeping safety as a priority.

Replace the TSA agent whose sole job is to repeat the same thing over and over again with a looping video and audio monitor. Heck, a CD player bought at CVS for less than $20 set to auto-repeat does the same job than hiring the TSO for what $20,000/yr per head?

Replace the TSA agent whose responsibility is to cart back the trays over to the landside with say, a conveyor belt or a angled railing that automatically does the same job.

These two would save lots of money just in labor expenses alone.


For international travel, just implement an exit immigration procedure. Lots of countries do this; that's why they have two stamps to put into our passports: one for entry, second for exit. Probably the UK, US, Mexico and Canada are the only four countries that I know of that doesn't have an exit immigration process.

Can you imagine the mess if the rules were defined by each airline, or each airport? You would have to re-clear security when making a domestic connection, if the originating airline or airport had different rules than your connection.

From a practical point of view, we need a single national standard on what is allowed into the secure area and onto a plane. While I suppose that could be defined by an industry group like the Air Transit Association, the federal government is the obvious choice.

Who actually enforces those standards (TSA, DOT, airlines, airports?) is a whole separate issue, of course.

Millions of people get on buses, trains, and subways every day in the US with no screening.

If we can define the "what", without specifying the "how," then we may be on to something. The "how" is the problem. There are many of us that agree that the current "how" is a sham and may be worse than worthless. It may, please excuse my suggestion as it is shocking, include an incarnation of the TSA that only basically resembles what we have now. But, it may not. We have to get smart. We can not keep on throwing things against the wall just to see what sticks.

Well, actually we can, but we shouldn't.

Absolutely not. I should never have to ask permission to leave a country. It's one of the few things that I think the US does well concerning security and immigration.

Heck no! Airports/airlines would be free to compete based on "security" vs. security. The passengers would be able to choose airports/airlines that offer the level of security/harassment they feel comfortable participating in. The federal government should have zero say in the matter. It just makes things worse.

You should watch the movie Please Remove Your Shoes for some good suggestions. Pretty much TSA, DHS, FBI, and foreign equivalents all view knowledge as their precious and they don't want to share. They keep it hidden in a corner and stroke it and then when something happens they say "yes, we knew that was a problem,but we weren't going to tell you :p"

Agencies should share knowledge.

I can't remember the other suggestions off the top of my head.

I think at this point as a practical matter, the federal government is too deeply involved in airport "security" to cede control to the airlines. Even if TSA were to be disbanded, the feds would still control what private contractors were required to do at the airports, which could just lead to greater abuses/incompetence. I don't think there is much point in getting rid of TSA, better to somehow change the culture at TSA.

If I were in charge I would move TSA from DHS to the Department of Transportation. I would shift screening priorities to cargo and go back to pre 9/11 levels for passengers. I would also let go of all but the few professional TSOs, raise pay levels for TSOs, and hire some new TSOs (although far less than are currently employed) who are capable and have a security background---and thus have a leaner but skilled workforce.

What to do with the TSA short term-

1. Full accountability of TSA employees, with levels of discipline up to and including termination.

2. Initiate a focus on customer service training for screening clerks, instead of barking and asking “Do you want to fly today?” The fact that the TSA has publicly stated that customer service is not a priority in its Engage! training is appalling.

3. End the War on Liquids. The exemptions make it pointless, and even if there was such a Magic Liquid™ that could be used to create a bomb airside without laboratory conditions if you just had enough of it, just send ten guys through the checkpoint with their Kippie Bags and combine it airside.

4. End the Shoe Carnival. The X-Ray machine cannot detect explosives, period.

5. Eliminate the gate screenings. The fact that this is being done in MCI, where each gate area pretty much has its own checkpoint to start with, is proof that this is nothing more than security theatre and workfare.

6. Get rid of the No Fly List. There’s no effective means of redress or oversight how the list is managed. If the people on these lists are so dangerous, arrest them.

7. Stop the ID checks. The TSA has no need to know who I am or where I’m flying. This is nothing more than revenue protection on behalf of the airlines. The thought that I must “present my papers” to travel within the border of my own country is disgusting.

8. Stop using the checkpoint as a dragnet. College kids with a fake IDs, illegal aliens, or some common criminal wanted on a drug charge somewhere are not a threat to commercial aviation. We have other government agencies tasked for this.

9. Kill LASP dead in its tracks. There is no reason whatsoever the TSA should encroach on General Aviation. Personal Liberties — For the first time, the TSA’s regulatory activities would be extended to personal GA aircraft, historic and vintage aircraft, and operators, passengers, and pilots flying for personal and business use. As such, the LASP is a radical departure from anything the TSA has enacted to date. It would, in effect, require governmental review and authority before you could operate your own personal vehicle.

10. End the mission creep. No more TSA appearances at sporting events, bus and train stations, or highways. Let the real law enforcement professionals tasked with these venues handle things without interference from the TSA.

11. The junk science SPOT program gets the boot.

12. Stop the use and deployment of Nude-O-Scopes. They don't see into body cavities or detect explosives, are an intrusion into privacy and needlessly add to cumulative lifetime radiation doses. All that is needed is WTMD, x-ray, and ETD/ETP.

13. The wearing of metal “LEO style” badges is stopped immediately, and replaced with the screening clerk’s name and identification number that is plainly visible.

14. Eliminate theatrics like the TSA Honor Guard. There is no need for screening clerks to dress up in silly costumes and parade around.

15. Stop any consideration of having screening clerks armed with firearms, or having any LEO powers.

What to do with the TSA long term-

The TSA should become a part of the DOT. Actual screening should be done by private contractors with oversight by the DOT or FAA. Funny how we never heard the constant stories of mistreatment and harassment of PAX, organized rings of theft and general thuggery when this was being done by private sector firms.

You should watch this video..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2HyAV-SEsg

Go to the 10:40 mark.

Quote from Kip Hawley: "The machines are not capable of storing images."

Liar.

I would prefer either the military, the FBI or local police forces -- I want either trained LEOs or trained soldiers, i.e. professionals whose job it is spotting bad guys. China uses the military and they are efficient, professional and polite. Other nations use, I think, national police (we don't have that, of course).

What I don't want are clerks on power trips.

Note, too, that what I really want is actual security, balanced against risk. What we have now is strictly a dog-and-pony show. When I want theater I go to Broadway. When I want security, I put professionals in charge.

I'm not sure some aspects of the TSA need to be replaced --that is, they should just be eliminated. Airline executives in the UK are starting to grumble as well. As this quote from Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary shows.

“I’ll never cease to be amazed at the extent to which bureaucrats can invent more procedures that do nothing for safety except give people the impression that they’ve done something,” O’Leary said in an interview. “We’ve got to stop this nonsense of taking people’s shoes and water off them.”

He's right on the nose.

How many of us would be willing to pay another $20-30 a ticket for that? There's already an uproar about 90% retirement for police officers in California, let alone many of them with $100,000+ salaries. How would you fund such an initiative without more ticket taxes? It would probably take a year or more for local law enforcement to recruit, hire and train to be able to spare personnel to run checkpoints (unless you want to use existing personnel and pay overtime).

I wouldn't mind paying $20-30 extra a ticket for real security. However, I doubt that it would be that expensive. TSA is one of the most wasteful agencies I've ever seen.

San Jose has been in the news a lot that last few months because of layoffs there. The yearly cost of a San Jose police officer is $180,000 when you add in the benefits. Does anyone have a comparable figure for what the total cost is for one TSA screener?
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...bay&id=7526202

The military is primarily trained to kill and destroy.

They expect orders to be followed without question.

Do you really want that in our airports?

Like most of the serious other countries:
The United States Military.