Spiff,

Sorry, didnt mean to come off condescending. What I'm trying to say is the flying public only gets half of the policy presented.

Example:

I'm on walk thru and suggest a passenger take his shoes off. He refuses and I let him through and he doesn't ring, but I direct him to secondary.

"I didn't alarm the machine and the shoe policy states I have the right to refuse!"
or
"Why, my shoes aren't susipicous!"
is his response. (Heard both of these many times)

Problem is, screeners got presented with the policy but it outlines what TSA feels is "susipicous" and must be screened.

Thats really what I mean. The policy you folks get to read, only give you half a picture, as there supposed to. But a lot of passengers paint that as the whole picture.

If you sat at a walk thru long enough you would for sure understand what it is the policy wants taken off and on.

Fenito: I do not believe that I have ever said that I or my wife has cursed at a TSA employee or any screener.

Our worst sin has been to be "formally" polite rather then effusive, and to point out -- twice in scores of flights -- that a procedure is not consistant with what is explained on the website.

I fly a lot. Most security passages have been without incident. But enough have been unpleasant, and unnecessarily so, and abusive of the power the screeners have, that I am really livid about it. We give up our rights to be treated decently just because we fly?

There is nothing in the rules that says I have to be pleasant to you guys, but I do try to be. It usually works. When my wife is having a negative morning and can't be artificially cheerful to the boarding pass checker and we are then informed that her "attitude" will keep us from flying that day.... how is that protecting the air traffic system from terrorists?

All that is doing is letting an azzhole make other people miserable for the sheer joy of it. And ruining the airlines' bottom line.

AAA did a survey that showed about 25% of short-distance flyers were driving now in order to avoid the indignities of "security".

Point, game, match: Osama. We are busy defeating ourselves, dammit.

But you see, many of us know you're not only looking for hidden metal objects but are also looking for explosives and that for some reason 1" has magically been chosen as the thickness for shoe soles that is deemed suspicious.

Additionally, many of us know that the same volume of material that could be in the shoe soles could be very easily hidden on or inside a person, thus completely rendering the x-raying of shoes useless.

It's policies like these where even though the complete picture is not given to the traveling public under the cloud of SSI, the obviousness and ineffectiveness of such policies makes them nothing more than harassment and a waste of time and money.

To further the point, look at the 1" thickness "guideline". This number really has been magically pulled out of someone's hind end. One can certainly cause enough damage to bring down a plane with a lesser volume of explosive. Or a couple of people traveling at different times of the day could pass through the checkpoint and leave such smaller volumes for each other to combine into a larger volume. Plastic-type explosives are extremely malleable and are extremely unlikely to explode without considerable heat or force, which is why a blasting cap or similar trigger is needed.

Such a system is so appallingly simple to circumvent that it is downright insulting that it's being used to "protect" us. Your agency might as well hand out garlic and crucifixes to ward off these unholy terrorists...

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 11-11-2003).]

That's a lot like screaming about "rights" to a cop as he or she deals with you. Sure, it's your right to say these things but it will do nothing but get the backs up of some of the less professional screeners. We screeners have almost no customer-service training so you get responses in situations like this that run the gamut and tend to reflect the natural reactions of the screener, not the organization.

BTW, earlier when I referred to "the point-nazis", I wasn't referring to my innner point-nazi but rather a select few other screeners who seem ready to pounce on perceived disrespectful customers at a moment's notice. They're annoying and they're usually unprofessional but they make up 10-20% of the screener workforce so watch out.

CATSA: in the few occasions in my life I have dealt with cops, I have always been polite and deferential. Usually, I have disobeyed some traffic rule and I'M SURE TO BE CONTRITE then. Otherwise, they are helping me report something which has happened to me.

Very different situation from trying to board an airplane. Police are VERY WELL TRAINED to know that you are officially innocent, even if they've just clocked you at 75 mph (130 kph).

Most screeners are polite, but a few -- I think your 10-20% estimate is not far off the mark -- use their position to work out their own inner demons. We are all considered guilty unless we are demonstratively obsequious to them.

Many former frequent flyers are now driving or doing virtual meetings in order to avoid this. Your 10-20% load of creeps means that I run into one every third flight or so (interact with at least three TSA employees per flight, times 10% azzhole ratio --).

I have a lot of business on the left coast and cannot avoid flying or will have to completely change my life. Most of my flights and security interactions are benign, because I usually put up with the crap. But the ones that go wrong go very wrong and it seems the variable each time is the control-freak gestapo attitude of the particular screener. I react to that. Please do not tell me just to suck it up and bend over. We fought a revolution and many wars to not live in that sort of country, thank you very much.

NONE OF THIS SECURITY CRAP ACTUALLY MAKES US ANY SAFER. I know most passengers are sheep and don't know anything about probabilities, but that does not mean we are all Faux News fodder. What we are talking about here is power relationships and little people in big jobs who are getting their jollies by pushing travellers around.

It is helping to kill the airlines, keep people from travel, and not doing a dam thing to stop determined terrorists.



------------------
"We know you have a choice of airlines" ... the most important frequent-flyer words you heard this week.

I do apologize Lex, I was misinterpreting, it has been a long 24 hours...no sleep, all work. There is nothing we CAN do to stop a determined terrorist. That's been proven many times over. All we can do is devise a better more efficient security system and do the best job we can with highly trained professionals doing the job. Whether it is government or private, that's all we can ask for. I work at GSO, and honestly I will say there are a few screeners that have no respect for anyone and do have that chip on their shoulders, but we are weeding them out. If you ever get a chance to fly through there, stop by and chat with the screeners. I swear that anytime I'm out in public after work and still have my uniform on, I get alot of compliments on how professional and courteous we are just because we answered a simple question. I try to screen each passenger in the same manner, explain everything I'm doing, answer any questions, be polite (unless 4 letter words get involved) and do the job quickly. It is like a once a week deal, sometimes a little more, when I actually get a real irate passenger. Mainly it's because they woke up late and got to the airport like 30 minutes before their flight and there is a security line that they can't cut into, so by the time they reach the xray they aren't too happy, and then they set off the walk through and then the fun begins. Again I do apologize for the misinterpretation.

LexPassenger,

Fenito is right, there isn't much we can do to stop a determined terrorists, and it's been proven. Even with improved security and personal, terrorists will find a way into the aircraft.

But if we could find a way to clog ever hole and put some of the highly trained people on the checkpoints, then we stand a lot better chance of stopping these guys/gals. The more we can trip them up, the better.

"Such a system is so appallingly simple to circumvent that it is downright insulting that it's being used to "protect" us. Your agency might as well hand out garlic and crucifixes to ward off these unholy terrorists..."

I've already stated I don't agree with the policy Spiff. But the fact is I have to do it or face my own little problems.

As for many of you know what the policy really is, thats good. But the fact is about 60% to 70% of the people that come through the checkpoint I work don't know the policy, other then what they read in the newspaper.

Many FF might know, I won't argue that point. But the fact is, only about 30% of the daily travelers out my airports are FF's, the rest are first time, yearly or maybe every other month flyers.

And I know who the FF's are because they come up and do everything themselves without having to be told a thing, so I don't even bother telling them the rules because they know them. Their not the ones who give me the comments, their the ones that make my job easier because I can then talk to people behind them that aren't paying attention to what he/she is doing to get ready and are standing around with no clue on what to do.

Shh....
He'll have to kill us if he tells us.

We're suppose to Trust the Goon outfit called TSA. An outfit that cannot be held accountable for anything in the name of Safety?!? Not me.

So CarmelHead what is your solution to this problem.

Carmel,

Read to me where I stated for you trust me?

Thats right I didn't. I'm tired of what you seem to think are witting come backs. Troll another board would you.

Also to clear up that sentence for everyone,

Pretty much what Im saying is your not ever given a TSA policy or your given only half the policy. What Im saying is that only so many people know that. The FF's know it, and its great. But the fact is I deal with people like CarmelGreg more on a day to day basis, who think that the policy given to them is the whole policy and will flash it out on us, saying we have no reason to screen them, since they didn't ring. (Spiff, I know. We don't have a reason adn you shouldn't be checked but TSA higher ups, have deemed it so.)

From this point on Carmel, I'll ignore but you proably wanted that, so what does it matter.

I'm tired of fighting for TSA's sake, and tired of trying to get people to see both sides of the story. Some people obviously only like their side, which makes them A$$holes, $hitheads, C**Ksuckers, you name it. I'm tired of someone telling me I know squat about security and safety. I'm tired of someone telling me my job is a joke. And I'm sick and tired of know-it-alls who only want to B*tch and moan and not come up with a solution. You know what we would do with you when I was in the military. Drop your @ss out in the middle of nowhere to rot and die, or ship you back home to your mommie to bottle feed you a little more til you grow up and become a real person. I'm not the type of person to let things under my skin. But I do, however, believe in respect. Now I don't care if you want to generalize people, it's wrong and it shouldn't be done. If you can't say something respectable about the people who do their jobs correctly and work every day to bring home money to pay bills, then come on in to NC, we'll meet, I'll show you what hard work is and give you a better perspective of what respect means.

You security guys are starting to see how frustrated we get with the stupid TSA policies. Good for you!!!

Dude, don't take it personally. Thats when you have truly lost. The goading will only get worse if you let them get to you. These guys who are "frustrated" over the policies have some good points, but they see you, as an individual, as someone who is trampling on their "freedoms." Freedoms....one of the most overused and misunderstood words used on this board. If they really knew how much "freedom" they had, a very narrow definition can be found in the "bill of rights" then they would realize that they are very wrong on that count Don't let them get to you, but don't let them "trample" on you either.

------------------
Don't take life too seriously, afterall, you won't get out alive.

Do a search. There are many, rational solutions proposed, but your leaders refuse to listen. That's why you, as the point of contact, hear so often about how little your agency knows about real security and how un-American your agency's policies are and why many of us wish your agency would be permanently disbanded for the disgrace that it is.

Nothing personal, of course.



------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

Now Spiff. What is more American that following the directions that Congress has laid out. I think to do otherwise would be "un-american." Where would we be if everyone decided what directions from our elected officials we would follow and which ones we would not? Why, even Patrick Henry would be aghast at that prospect, for it tears at the very fabric that our nation was founded upon....a "representative" republic.



------------------
Don't take life too seriously, afterall, you won't get out alive.