Elderly passenger triggers security alert at D/FW Airport
Dec 27, 2010, 11:09 am
#16
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
and viewable 
TSA described it as a minor incident, but it nevertheless sparked a grandma manhunt throughout the entire airport.
Out of an Abundance of Caution®, The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has issued the following security directive. Effective immediately, all grandparents must be placed inside a 1 quart see thru zip-lock plastic bag prior to entrance to the secure area. If a grandparent cannot fit inside the zip-lock baggie, Transportation Security Officers (TSO's) will instruct passengers to place their grandparents inside their checked luggage.
The TSA: Keeping you safe in the war on terror, one penis, two breasts and one grandma at a time
The TSA: Keeping you safe in the war on terror, one penis, two breasts and one grandma at a time
Dec 27, 2010, 11:13 am
#17
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 449
Even the TSA doesn't believe the passenger was really a threat, no matter that she set off some alarm. If they believed she was a threat they would have had dumped the airport. Instead, they're more worried about the negative publicity from a terminal dump while searching for grandma. All this episode demonstrates is that even the TSA believes that invasive searches of everyone are theater and are not necessary for security, and that they're more concerned with their pr than actual security.
Dec 28, 2010, 8:15 pm
#19
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
As it turns out, the TSA actually did find the woman and apparently decided to do the follow-up scan at her destination.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
Dec 28, 2010, 8:17 pm
#20
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SEA/YVR/BLI
Programs: UA "Lifetime" Gold, AS MVPG100K, OW Emerald, HH Lifetime Diamond, IC Plat, Marriott Gold, Hertz Gold
Posts: 9,489
As it turns out, the TSA actually did find the woman and apparently decided to do the follow-up scan at her destination.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
Dec 28, 2010, 8:23 pm
#21
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: ABE/PHL/EWR
Programs: UA Gold
Posts: 396
Why not? A passenger managed to enter the sterile area of the airport without having completed screening. Furthermore, the passenger in question had an unidentified item on her person which TSA was concerned enough about to want to search her further. Using TSA logic ... why shouldn't this cause an immediate shutdown of the terminal?
Oh, and I'm LOL'ing how the TSA made her go through security once she was doine flying. ....
Dec 28, 2010, 8:35 pm
#22
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Austin (TX)
Posts: 308
would have liked to see what they would have done had she refused screening at the destination...once on the ground AT the destination, the whole DY...T loses its significance as a threat. And I would have LOVED to see the debate about jurisdiction if the TSA insisted on trying to press charges, not to mention that I do not see a judge in EITHER Cali OR Texas finding that the post-flight search was 'reasonable' in light of the alleged mission of TSA (that whole BS about making flying safer).
Dec 28, 2010, 8:48 pm
#23
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 555
would have liked to see what they would have done had she refused screening at the destination...once on the ground AT the destination, the whole DY...T loses its significance as a threat. And I would have LOVED to see the debate about jurisdiction if the TSA insisted on trying to press charges, not to mention that I do not see a judge in EITHER Cali OR Texas finding that the post-flight search was 'reasonable' in light of the alleged mission of TSA (that whole BS about making flying safer).
~~ Irish
Dec 28, 2010, 8:50 pm
#24
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
Intersting snippet
When I am sent for my secondary for my orthopedic shoes, I am never "waved" to go into the little plexiglass booth. The WTMD gatekeeper watches me enter and stands sideways to watch both me and the pax coming thru the WTMD so imho, if "grandma" was waved on to a secondary, somebody dropped the ball 
On Christmas Day at D/FW, a woman described as very elderly showed up with an anomaly on her scan. She was waved on to secondary check, but instead went to her gate and boarded her flight.
Dec 28, 2010, 8:51 pm
#25
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,145
As it turns out, the TSA actually did find the woman and apparently decided to do the follow-up scan at her destination.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
Dec 28, 2010, 9:08 pm
#27
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Northern California, in the redwoods, on the ocean.
Posts: 437
Hey, that would have been my conclusion. "OK, you boys are through playing your little games, I can go now, toodle-oo!"
Dec 28, 2010, 10:33 pm
#28
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 453
As it turns out, the TSA actually did find the woman and apparently decided to do the follow-up scan at her destination.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
Hey TSA/DHS the screening is suppose to be done before one gets on the plane so says the rules implimented by you or did that just slip your minds that day.
Oh I know what happened... The TSA Agent who was suppose to prevent the elderly lady from leaving the area got distracted by some hot passenger getting the all over feel up in the next lane over.
Dec 29, 2010, 2:28 am
#29
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,444
As it turns out, the TSA actually did find the woman and apparently decided to do the follow-up scan at her destination.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the concept of making everyone safer by scanning her four hours later, when she got off the plane.
Dec 29, 2010, 7:59 am
#30
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
My new theory - the TSA needed to compare the saved scanner image with what they really found on the woman so as to have something to train people with.
(Yes, I'm aware that the TSA has claimed they don't store the images. I'm also aware that their "training" is laughable. This post is closed-captioned for the sarcasm-impaired.)
(Yes, I'm aware that the TSA has claimed they don't store the images. I'm also aware that their "training" is laughable. This post is closed-captioned for the sarcasm-impaired.)