If so, I'm in trouble...

If TA employees are going to be the ones working the dogs I'm betting they will screw the pooch!

TSA has fouled up everything else it has touched.

Did anyone else see the thread title and go to a really bad place?

Mike

Indeed correct. That is what I meant when I stated they are trained by commodity i.e. the commodity being either drugs, or FX, or currency etc. Multi-scent is something different e.g. in the case of drugs having the ability to detect different classes of drugs which have a different scent. The scent of the constituents of Cocaine being different to that of Cannabis for e.g.

Yeah, I just wanted to say something that was a little more meaty than 'This!'

I am guessing they might do just that by 'airing up' around anything with certain chemicals in it but any K9 expert feel free to correct me.

If dogs were used, they would boost the collective IQ of TSA. TSA does not want to be shown up.

They are having a hard time because Rep Peter King, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, provides authorization oversight of the TSA. At the FY 2012 budget hearing shortly after the new Congress took office, he told Nappy and Pissy that his committee was the only one providing oversight of the TSA. So, King gave them the top cover they need to blow off any other House Committee. Pissy has taken full advantage as recently as last week when he blew off Mica's hearing on universal pilot licenses. Worse yet, Mr. Speaker is allowing this to happen. Bohner could fix this with one conversation.

Another powerful advantage of dogs is their mere presence at a checkpoint would have a profound deterrent effect. A suicide bomber could swallow a bunch of condoms full of explosives and a small detonator and approach a strip search scanner with absolute confidence his terror mission would be successful. However a terrorist approaching a checkpoint carrying explosives and encountering a dog would have to feel serious doubt about the likelihood of successfully avoiding detection, irregardless of the dogs actual skill level. I suspect he would be many many times less likely to even try that checkpoint in the first place.

IMO the last two bombing attempt failed specifically due to a similar deterrent effect from WTMD's. Both the shoe bomber and the panty bomber failed in their terror missions due to not having a proper detonator for their bombs. The only plausible reason they did not have a proper detonator is, it would contain metallic components and they were not confident it would pass through a WTMD undetected. So they didn't bring a proper detonator and their bombs BOTH failed because of that simple fact. Dogs would present a similar and even more profound deterrent effect. OTOH Strip search scanners and groping don't have the same deterrent effect because they are easily defeated with almost 100% certainty by using tactics to carry things internally.

I happen to know someone who trained dogs to sniff out drugs, explosives and other contraband/illegal items for the federal government and military. She tells me that dogs are very effective at this type of detection. She also said that they are similar to people in that they get fatigued, are moody or can get distracted. A good handler knows when the dog simply isn't up for the task.

Using explosive detection machines as the routine detection technology is not a waste of money. Using explosive detection dogs to follow up on a package that alarmed the ETD (after ruling out other possibilities) is smart; however, it all depends on what's a reasonable time limit if the dog isn't immediately available. To say that there should be a dog at the checkpoint constantly may sound reasonable, but once again, dogs tend to get bored, distracted, moody, tired and restless.

not at all unlike the screener that the TSA employ currently.

Olfaction is my business and before the TSA existed, the FAA hired me to teach gerbils to odor detect explosives (in checked in luggage) - after the Lockerbe Pan Am catastrophe. Took their money willingly but knew that all the bad guys have to do is seal the expolsives in airtight containers (or shrink wrap) and odor detection is worthless.
If the TSA is actually pursuing the odor detecting dog thing, then they really are less intelligent than the Bad Guys.

As mentioned above, it seems the TSA is always one step behind the terrorists.

Who cares? Since the dogs will have nothing to find the point is moot. At least the dog doesn't want to look at naked pics or feel up crotches all day. Passengers will be happy due to the dual benefits of not being groped/irradiated and the dog providing the security theater.

I'm not so sure about that My neighbors dog seems to have a fascination with my crotch

So what TSA really needs is to return the puffers to the screening lanes after working out the faults or operator errors.

ETP, ETD, WTMD, HHMD, perhaps sniffer dogs and only after all of that is not good enough then a pat down.