|
For the bomb to get on the plane. All the bad guys have to do is to recruit, for the right amount of money, or threaten the family members of a person who is totally exempt from being screened and can simply walk through the TSA check point without getting a second glance from the TSA screeners. They take the bomb on the plane set it to go off for a pre-determined time and simply walk right back off the plane with the excuse they forgot something or need to get back to the office for an emergency. No one in the airport will be suspicious of someone whom the government says is completely trustworthy and doesn't need to be screened. The plane takes off and depending on how long the flight. AN hour or more later the plane is blown out of the sky. But John Pistole and Janet Napolitano can't see the forrest for the trees. They think that people who have been given background checks are completely not capable of commiting a terrorist act because of money or to save their own family members.
|
Originally Posted by Lara21
(Post 16208990)
For the bomb to get on the plane. All the bad guys have to do is to recruit, for the right amount of money, or threaten the family members of a person who is totally exempt from being screened and can simply walk through the TSA check point without getting a second glance from the TSA screeners. They take the bomb on the plane set it to go off for a pre-determined time and simply walk right back off the plane with the excuse they forgot something or need to get back to the office for an emergency. No one in the airport will be suspicious of someone whom the government says is completely trustworthy and doesn't need to be screened. The plane takes off and depending on how long the flight. AN hour or more later the plane is blown out of the sky. But John Pistole and Janet Napolitano can't see the forrest for the trees. They think that people who have been given background checks are completely not capable of commiting a terrorist act because of money or to save their own family members.
There are many dozens of ways to walk right through security . Honestly I never realized just how insecure things are until this crap. ... they aren't addressing any of the major issues... tampon bombs, private aircraft, tarmac access, disassembled bombs in carry ons, low density explosives (still walk right through), bombs in checked baggage (90% gets through) yadda yadda... its particularly sick that they are taking it out on children. |
Originally Posted by flying bookman
(Post 16208964)
I hope you didn't really say this. If you did, it was incredibly rude and uncalled for. I'd have punched you in your face if you had said this to me. Who do you think you are calling someone poorly educated and less intelligent than you? Since when do you get to decide what jobs are suitable for anyone you aren't hiring. I hope your children have to work in retail or food service one day, then maybe you'll see how much of a ..... statement that is. I hope you are not a role model for anyone.
I think it's incredibly rude and uncalled for to lay hands on someone under the pretense of "searching" them with no probable cause, no reasonable suspicion, and to consider them a terrorist until proven otherwise. I think it's incredibly rude and uncalled for to lie to people to get them to go through a device that produces ionizing radiation. And I think it's remarkably stupid to threaten to punch someone in the face for calling someone uneducated. I hope you aren't a role model for anyone. |
Originally Posted by studentff
(Post 16199900)
Anything TSA wishes to do to me should be done in full view of the public. If they demand that I drop my pants (and assuming I agree to it instead of leaving the airport), it should be in public.
Allowing a stranger to force you to a private room is absurdly stupid. There is enormous risk to both the passenger and the TSA employees if one decides to make accusations against the other. Private rooms should be an option for sensitive passengers, but never required by TSA. :td: |
Originally Posted by tanja
(Post 16200389)
I would never go to a private room with a total stranger.
That would make me "sick". And then I am also from a country that "we" can choose from being pated down or show that we dont hide anything. I would show not allow being touched. |
Originally Posted by average_passenger
(Post 16202331)
It sounds like there are a lot of false positives! Uhm, shouldn't they look into this and figure out a more accurate screening method? How many false negatives do they get?!!!
Regarding private screenings - that sucks if you are an 18-21 year old female college student who is flying alone for the holidays. Imagine if that was your daughter! So, what you're saying is that if I go to a bar on the wrong side of town at 2am by myself, I would still have less of a chance of being touched inappropriately than if I were at the airport? Where are my rights as a female passenger flying alone? The average is about 1 in 1000, and many are not false positives. Most are brought about by the passenger not removing someting from their pockets, or leaving a belt on, or moving during the scan and blurring the image. 18 to 21 year old females will have female TSO's doing the screening, and can still request a witness of their choice to be in the private screening room with them. As for your rights "as a female passenger flying alone", I'm not a lawyer, nor am I female. You will need to ask someone else. Preferrably a lawyer, the folks here dont have a very firm grasp of the laws involved. |
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 16214107)
the folks here dont have a very firm grasp of the laws involved.
|
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 16214107)
18 to 21 year old females will have female TSO's doing the screening, and can still request a witness of their choice to be in the private screening room with them.
|
You keep bringing up this "witness of your choice," like that makes it better for a woman (or person) traveling alone to be going off to a secret back room having no idea what will happen to her and no idea what her rights are in the situation. How does someone traveling alone get the witness of their choice in that situation? A TSA-allied LEO wouldn't be "my choice," nor would some random airline employee or traveler who happened to be in the vicinity. My husband, lawyer, or intimidating, muscular friend with an anger management problem, those would be my preferred choices. But if I'm traveling alone? I don't get my witness of choice.
What you don't seem to understand, Ron, is that we ladies have our SOP we follow when we are traveling alone, not unlike how kids are taught about "good touch bad touch." One of the cardinal rules is not to allow a potential predator to lure you to a secondary (especially private!) location. Statistically, that is how crime victims get the worst of what's coming to them, including rape and murder. I'm not suggesting that rape and murder are what awaits ladies in the TSO's back room, but you are indeed "manipulating social norms" here, demanding that we drop our own, long-standing, well-crafted safety procedures to comply with your haphazard process which seems to change by the day and location, which we are not allowed to fully understand, and which is carried out by people we have no way to make sure do not, in fact, have hostile intent. Just like you must assume we are all potential terrorists, it's in our best interests to assume that you and your colleagues are potential predators. You know. Out of the abundance of caution. Anything for safety. |
Originally Posted by phoebepontiac
(Post 16214293)
You keep bringing up this "witness of your choice," like that makes it better for a woman (or person) traveling alone to be going off to a secret back room having no idea what will happen to her and no idea what her rights are in the situation. How does someone traveling alone get the witness of their choice in that situation? A TSA-allied LEO wouldn't be "my choice," nor would some random airline employee or traveler who happened to be in the vicinity. My husband, lawyer, or intimidating, muscular friend with an anger management problem, those would be my preferred choices. But if I'm traveling alone? I don't get my witness of choice.
|
Originally Posted by TSORon
(Post 16214078)
Then you are free to bring along a witness of your choice. Friend, family, fellow passenger, heck you might even be able to talk a local LEO into it. We wont mind, honest.
|
Originally Posted by phoebepontiac
(Post 16214293)
What you don't seem to understand, Ron, is that we ladies have our SOP we follow when we are traveling alone, not unlike how kids are taught about "good touch bad touch." One of the cardinal rules is not to allow a potential predator to lure you to a secondary (especially private!) location. Statistically, that is how crime victims get the worst of what's coming to them, including rape and murder. I'm not suggesting that rape and murder are what awaits ladies in the TSO's back room, but you are indeed "manipulating social norms" here, demanding that we drop our own, long-standing, well-crafted safety procedures to comply with your haphazard process which seems to change by the day and location, which we are not allowed to fully understand, and which is carried out by people we have no way to make sure do not, in fact, have hostile intent. Just like you must assume we are all potential terrorists, it's in our best interests to assume that you and your colleagues are potential predators. You know. Out of the abundance of caution. Anything for safety. BTW, I can't wait for some little kid to kick the crap out of some officer who is trying to touch them in a bad way. |
Originally Posted by exbayern
(Post 16214332)
I really appreicate Ink's sincere offer made a few places here to be a witness, but I also believe that the vast majority of people would decline such a request for a variety of reasons.
Furthermore, if it is another traveler, TSA will undoubtedly demand to see their boarding pass, meaning they know how long to prolong the encounter to make the witness risk a flight. It might help if TSA would allow filming/recording of the private screening if the pax wants to film/record it. After all, the pax is the one whose privacy is being violated, so if the pax is willing to film him/herself, and TSA is following SOP, why would TSA have a problem with this? |
Originally Posted by N965VJ
(Post 16214174)
The SOP is different for females over 21? :confused:
|
Originally Posted by phoebepontiac
(Post 16214293)
What you don't seem to understand, Ron, is that we ladies have our SOP we follow when we are traveling alone, not unlike how kids are taught about "good touch bad touch." One of the cardinal rules is not to allow a potential predator to lure you to a secondary (especially private!) location.
Not really sure if a TSO trains kids on 'good touch, bad touch' and going into private places with strangers the same way I would, however. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:04 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.