Touching face and hair -- what is point?

Old Feb 16, 11, 6:33 pm
  #166  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,889
Originally Posted by gsoltso View Post
it is not about trust, it is about making certain that I screen folks equally. I never really thought about the not trusting the public angle, but it is not a good precedent to set from a security point of view.
Yet the TSA has set such a precedent and it is part of SOP
Tom M. is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 7:26 am
  #167  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,952
Originally Posted by njbaglady View Post
I don't believe the face stroking story for a minute, a man wouldn't be patting down a woman. But most of all I don't believe what I read here. Adults calling other people creeps and other demeaning terms! What are you 12 yrs old???? Talk about ridiculous! Take a bus! And to the person who brags she's told TSA she bettter not meet them on the outside !!! Honey if I worked there and you said that to me I would report you in a New York minute!!! Are you kidding me? I think all the name callers need to get on the aircraft - the one without security! The system may be flawed but at least they are trying, and that name callers is better than ANY of you !!!
As another poster suggested, you need to spend some time reading back posts in order to understand the outrage being offered here.

Read also Bruce Schneier's writings:

http://www.schneier.com/

Read John Mueller's paper "THE QUIXOTIC QUEST FOR INVULNERABILITY:
ASSESSING THE COSTS, BENEFITS, AND PROBABILITIES
OF PROTECTING THE HOMELAND"

About the only individuals who believe that the TSA is doing anything to secure air travel is the TSA - and our congresscritters who are, for the most part , scared sh****ss of voicing any anti-TSA sentiments. They are far behind the learning curve on how their constituents feel about TSA.
doober is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 7:36 am
  #168  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,952
Originally Posted by Caradoc View Post
...which is one of the hallmarks of antisocial personality disorders.

"I had to do that because I was following orders," fits neatly with "...there is a tendency to blame others, or to offer plausible rationalizations for the behaviour bringing the patient into conflict with society."

http://apps.who.int/classifications/...?gf60.htm+f602

Reading through the ICD-10 f60.2 is like reading an overview of TSA behaviors.
I don't see it as "I was only following orders" thing in order to rationalize one's actions. It's more of a substitution of "legitimate" actions for illegal actions: one becomes a LEO or a member of the military so they can legitimatize their desires to act in a certain manner.

Sociopaths and psychopaths do not see anything wrong with their actions, that's where blaming others for the results of their actions comes into play. Those who sublimate know that to act on their impulses is wrong so they substitute.
doober is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 8:49 am
  #169  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: IAD 19L
Programs: IHG; DL, JB, SW, UA, US, Ch, Crl, HzG, EmC, AmtGR regular; TSA Disp Tinfoil
Posts: 292
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much View Post
One guy at Dulles said, "Well, are you going to find me a new job?" My response was, "At this stage of my career, I find myself mentoring numerous young people and helping them network. If you would like my help, a good place to start is to ASK for it, not DEMAND it."
Dang. I was hoping some of the screeners would reply with something relevant. This reply seems to me like the screener doesn't like having to do stupid stuff and security theatre, but didn't have the balls to admit it to you.
flapping arms is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 9:20 am
  #170  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
Originally Posted by doober View Post
Sociopaths and psychopaths do not see anything wrong with their actions, that's where blaming others for the results of their actions comes into play. Those who sublimate know that to act on their impulses is wrong so they substitute.
Exactly.

They want to touch people's genitals. The TSA simply provides an excuse for them to do so.
Caradoc is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 11:45 am
  #171  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,258
Originally Posted by Lara21 View Post
My point is those two stupid fools need to get rid of the SSI when it comes to all the touchy feely stuff with the passengers.

I don't say that all SSI needs to be revealed, but when it comes to those patdowns. The exactly where and how the touching can be done needs to be clearly stated on a sign for the passenger to read

The reason for the SSI on that is to keep the terrorist in the dark, but the terrorist isn't in the dark. They know everything whether the passenger does or not.

I think I read on here in one post that you have a daughter. Are you really all that comfortable that a TSA Agent, who is a total stranger, can touch her all over at the airport and then they can hide behind SSI when it comes to where and how they can touch her. Just because it is a woman giving your daughter a patdown does not mean she can't be on a power trip and do something inappropriate to your daughter. Doesn't matter if your daughter is 15, 25 or 30 yeas old. She can still be a victim depending on how off guard she gets caught by someone in certain situations. The fact that SSI is apart of that patdown make abuse more easily to occur.
I am comfortable with it for one unfair reason, I know the protocols. I also know that if my daughter were to have something untowards done during screening, I would raise Cain. I understand what you are saying, and I agree that things like the patdown could be made public (I have done so for a while now). I do not make those decisions, nor do I have all of the information on why that information is SSI.
gsoltso is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 11:46 am
  #172  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,258
Originally Posted by Tom M. View Post
Yet the TSA has set such a precedent and it is part of SOP
Could you elaborate a bit for me? I think we may be speaking past each other here.
gsoltso is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 11:47 am
  #173  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,258
Originally Posted by Caradoc View Post
Exactly.

They want to touch people's genitals. The TSA simply provides an excuse for them to do so.
gsoltso is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 11:51 am
  #174  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,889
Originally Posted by gsoltso View Post
I am comfortable with it for one unfair reason, I know the protocols.
So you can understand why so many people are uncomfortable with it.

What would you do if you were not with your daughter and she described a pat down that did not follow protocol?
Tom M. is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 11:51 am
  #175  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,889
Originally Posted by gsoltso View Post
Could you elaborate a bit for me? I think we may be speaking past each other here.
The TSA does not screen everyone equally.
Tom M. is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 12:02 pm
  #176  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SFO or JFK or DCA or HKG
Posts: 20
Originally Posted by Tom M. View Post
The TSA does not screen everyone equally.
This is the issue for me, in a nutshell. The US is a nation of laws, and every citizen is entitled to due process and equal treatment under the law. The TSA should have a clear, thorough, published, and freely available list of regulations, so that we know exactly what to expect at checkpoints, what our consent entails, and, most importantly, when our rights as citizens are violated.

Private companies can hide behind this "it's just, like, our policy, man!" stuff, but this is the federal government we're talking about. TSA agents, as federal employees, should be bound by applicable US codes and concomitant judicial rulings governing consent, search and seizure, and detention. But what I see at checkpoints is lawless authoritarian bullying, and it has to be stopped.

Law, if it is to be meaningful, must be consistent. So, publish the rules and abide by them, you know?

Last edited by hkgphooey; Feb 17, 11 at 12:04 pm Reason: grammar, ugh
hkgphooey is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 12:18 pm
  #177  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
Originally Posted by hkgphooey View Post
The TSA should have a clear, thorough, published, and freely available list of regulations, so that we know exactly what to expect at checkpoints, what our consent entails, and, most importantly, when our rights as citizens are violated.
That would allow citizens to hold the TSA responsible for screwups by their employees - and will therefore never happen.
Caradoc is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 12:24 pm
  #178  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 855
Originally Posted by hkgphooey View Post
This is the issue for me, in a nutshell. The US is a nation of laws, and every citizen is entitled to due process and equal treatment under the law. The TSA should have a clear, thorough, published, and freely available list of regulations, so that we know exactly what to expect at checkpoints, what our consent entails, and, most importantly, when our rights as citizens are violated.

Private companies can hide behind this "it's just, like, our policy, man!" stuff, but this is the federal government we're talking about. TSA agents, as federal employees, should be bound by applicable US codes and concomitant judicial rulings governing consent, search and seizure, and detention. But what I see at checkpoints is lawless authoritarian bullying, and it has to be stopped.Law, if it is to be meaningful, must be consistent. So, publish the rules and abide by them, you know?

The parts I bolded are where I most strongly agree. It's my bottom line. We need to halt this pattern of behavior from our government before we suffer what Egypt is going through right now. We shouldn't just take it and take it until our youth boil over into the streets and we have riots and shootings. We should never let it get that bad.

They key is to shut down the unconstitutional behavior now, not wait until it gets "bad enough". It's already bad enough, because we can see where it's heading.

Last edited by ElizabethConley; Feb 17, 11 at 12:31 pm
ElizabethConley is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 12:32 pm
  #179  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southwest
Programs: HAL Platinum, JetBlue, KrisFlyer, NWA, USAirways, Alaska Air, who knows what levels? Changes daily
Posts: 97
Originally Posted by LHR/MEL/Europe FF View Post
I would much rather have people's hair touched than risk explosives being carried on board under a wig/turban/other head covering.

Can someone please explain how else you check these places without touching them?

No 'intimacy issue' is worth an explosive decompression at 35,000 feet, or death.

It's irrelevant whether they have caught someone or not yet. We don't know when the first incident will happen.

Perhaps the solution is to have a two tiered system. Planes with security, and planes without. I know which one I'd rather be on. And i know which one would make the more likely target for someone wishing to bring the plane down.

I don't get the need to stroke someone's face though. I would still like to see the written links that the OP mentioned to see the circumstances under which this happened.
Dogs have been used successfully in many other law enforcement situations. They can smell money, they pick up on contraband food, they can smell drugs, they can smell bombs, and they can be trained to pick up on behaviors found in certain types of criminals. They would be cheaper to maintain, and would be far more effective.

We need to demand accountability by Congress -- who OWNS these machines? Who is making money off them? (Hint - several of our elected officials have stock in the company that makes and distributes them.) We need to demand accountability on the radiation, not just for us who fly frequently, but also for the people working there. I watched a pregnant woman standing next to one for apparently her entire shift. THAT won't play out well on that little unborn baby. And we need to ask for the alternative -- dogs. There are enough dogs that were trained in the Middle east that they could - far more cheaply - reassign to the states. Instead, they put those dogs to sleep and install another hideous machine.

Can we get enough people to write letters to demand this? It seems like a viable option... Hmmm. Let's see: cost of dog food, training, and shelter versus cost of thousands of lawsuits after a year or two of this nonsense.
BSpeaker is offline  
Old Feb 17, 11, 12:38 pm
  #180  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southwest
Programs: HAL Platinum, JetBlue, KrisFlyer, NWA, USAirways, Alaska Air, who knows what levels? Changes daily
Posts: 97
Originally Posted by hkgphooey View Post
This is the issue for me, in a nutshell. The US is a nation of laws, and every citizen is entitled to due process and equal treatment under the law. The TSA should have a clear, thorough, published, and freely available list of regulations, so that we know exactly what to expect at checkpoints, what our consent entails, and, most importantly, when our rights as citizens are violated.

Private companies can hide behind this "it's just, like, our policy, man!" stuff, but this is the federal government we're talking about. TSA agents, as federal employees, should be bound by applicable US codes and concomitant judicial rulings governing consent, search and seizure, and detention. But what I see at checkpoints is lawless authoritarian bullying, and it has to be stopped.

Law, if it is to be meaningful, must be consistent. So, publish the rules and abide by them, you know?
I asked a TSA agent about the inconsistency from airport to airport and he said, "We do that on purpose. We don't want to be predictable to the criminals." So in their minds, they are doing it just fine.

It's the Stanford Prison experiment being played out in every airport in the nation. And, like sheep we acquiesce. Why? Because we - in that moment - have more important things to do... like board a plane. And we fear being put on a no-fly list. And they know that.
BSpeaker is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: