Geeze!?! Does that mean that if you cut a TSO in half that you'll end up with two of them?:confused: Heaven forfend!!:eek:

Completely correct, and that will be the downfall of this barbarism. This is a vast Milgram experiment, and the closer the TSOs actually have to get to their victims, the more reluctant they will be to carry out the crime. Why did TSA have to back off groping children under 12? My guess is there weren't enough people willing to do it. With luck that will spread.

I'm going to have to disagree again.

We've seen multiple postings from TSA employees saying that they fully support these searches, in order to make their family members "safe" they occasionally have to "upset" them.

I see it as very similar to those who argue that to protect their female relatives, they need to perform what is commonly referred to as "female genital mutilation," supposedly performed as a "modesty" measure.

If these people were capable of the least bit of empathy, they wouldn't be doing the things they do. But they're doing them, and even trying to justify their behavior.

Sociopathy is one possible explanation, and psychopathy is another.

But even more mind-boggling is the statement from some of them that they're only paid enough to grope people, and not paid enough to run the show. It reminds me of the old joke about Churchill and the socialite...

Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?
Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill… Well, I suppose… we would have to discuss terms, of course…
Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds?
Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!
Churchill: Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.

Cautery prevents that.

But the TSA employees do these things to other people day in, day out.

How do I reconcile the actions of TSA employees?

The big question, just where does that leave us in regards to TSA?

Rather than sociopathy or pscyhopathy, at least on the individual screener level, I believe there is a good deal of sublimation going on: individuals who have desires to take socially unacceptable actions diverting those desires to "approved" situations.

What started as a desire to have dominance over individuals in an "acceptable" way, via control at the checkpoint, has now escalated to allowing those who have desires that are absolutely unacceptable in any other situation to assault people at checkpoints under cover of "authority."

...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.

By using such an unprecedented dragnet that violates the sexual and personal privacy of people in an extremely invasive way, the TSA is operating consistently and by design in ways forbidden by the US Constitution. This makes them an outlaw organization.

Those who work for the TSA know or should know the nature of the violations they are performing against their fellow citizens and human beings. They have no excuse for what they are doing.

Their activities in the scope and grope area need to be brought to an end. I'm not terribly picky on how that gets done. Politically, judicially, or by other means. Politically and judicially would be best, and by choice I am participating to the extent I can in political solutions.

A practical concern is how to protect yourself and your family from this. One way is to not fly. Some fly but opt out. Some opt out and make things uncomfortable for the blue shirts.

If we can't turn this around, the things being done at airport checkpoints will get worse. Cavity search style scanners exist, and what do you think will happen to resolve issues there....?

I think TSA'ers are normal people, albeit without outstanding moral principles, courage or education. No spine and no mental flexibility to see the greater picture and understand the passenger's points of view. Very limited capacity for introspection.

I do not believe they are inherently evil, just banal.

^ I agree 100%!

In addition, they are people who have not been properly trained to be in positions of authority. Unfortunately, that authority is widely abused when you get the dreaded "Do you want to fly today?" or get told that the information you read on the TSA website it out of date.

Sadly, people who have not been trained to be in positions of authority are quick to discover the power they have can be used to boost their ego and suppress anyone that disagrees with them.

Yeah, I've heard this lame excuse so many times that the TSA website definitely needs a bolded statement on the front page that reads:

"Written statements on the official TSA website takes precendence over any other verbal comments or written statement made by an agent of the TSA and otherwise verbal or written internal memos that have not been updated to the TSA website. This clause cannot be reversed or changed and the violation of this clause by any agent of the TSA will result in immediate termination."

Remove their claimed "authoritah" of knowing more than the TSA website due to their incompetance.

TSA personnel have no authority over you. They are screening clerks. The mentality of the pre-TSA screening clerks was that they were screening CUSTOMERS. The TSA clerks mentality is that they are screening INMATES. There is a a distinct difference in how you approach people under both of those conceptions and how you treat them.

I may be by myself on this but I think one of the major reasons for bad morale in TSA is because the employees know they are doing things that are not acceptable under accepted standards of being an American.

I also believe that most of these people don't have the guts to stand up for their beliefs and tell TSA to take a hike.

Thinking about this touching of hair and face...

While the end result (and maybe some of the intent) is prison intake style screening, I'm wondering if whatever policy dictates touching face, neck, and hair is actually designed, like so many of these policies, so that a trained monkey could do it without any critical thinking. If someone had a big, poofy afro or a substantial beard it would be logical to search it. But, so that whether to search someone's hair or beard isn't left up to smurf's discretion, they touch everyone's neck, face, and hair. It's sort of like stories I've read where people get their bare arms frisked, and once they mention this is stupid, that part of the frisk is over.

Of course, they don't seem to touch everyone's, and they don't seem to all do it, so of course the whole thing is totally ridiculous. And the fact that they do it without thinking increases the likelihood that they won't think enough to actually discover anything. But I'm just wondering if, as a PP mentioned, this is rooted primarily in banal administrative nonsense.

Sorry if someone already mentioned this. I think I missed some of the thread.