TSA Modifies Security Search Guidelines
Dec 27, 2004 | 10:51 am
#61
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,343
Originally Posted by stimpy
As to the why this and why now questions, we already answered that. An upset US Congressperson can get a heck of a lot done when he or she gets their goat up. Sometimes they can be more powerful than the President.
Dec 27, 2004 | 10:02 pm
#62
Join Date: Oct 2004
Programs: TSA Reanimation Program
Posts: 148
Whoever asked yes it's true that the airlines are the ones who select you. I don't know who wrote up the guidelines they are using but man do they need to be revamped. A good portion of the selectees I see are completely unnecessary. My personal favorite is when dogs or cats are given boarding passes and they are marked as selectees. "Mr. Cabinpet? this is a joke right?" If only that were true.
But as I understand it there are situations when the airlines should de-select someone but often times they don't bother hitting F9 or whatever key is it to remove selectee status. So yeah direct some of your rage at them.
But as I understand it there are situations when the airlines should de-select someone but often times they don't bother hitting F9 or whatever key is it to remove selectee status. So yeah direct some of your rage at them.
Dec 27, 2004 | 10:32 pm
#63
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 21
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
1. Why this? I wonder what the TSA was afraid of? After all, there were "only" 250 complaints about the pat-down/groping policy and only one criminal investigation (DCA). Give the TSA's standards, that's not too bad. I wonder why they didn't just hunker down and absorb the criticism, which is another tactic of theirs they do very well. Why did they roll on pat-downs so quickly when they have refused to yield on the Shoe Fetish?
2. Why now? During the holiday season, many infrequent flyers fly. Arguably, these people are the TSA's biggest fans. One would think that the TSA would want to "demonstrate" this method of "tight security" to this audience and counter the groping complaints. The timing is really, really, strange to me.
2. Why now? During the holiday season, many infrequent flyers fly. Arguably, these people are the TSA's biggest fans. One would think that the TSA would want to "demonstrate" this method of "tight security" to this audience and counter the groping complaints. The timing is really, really, strange to me.
Given the lack of true resolution of the fundamental problem, I want to second or third the notion of "keep the complaints, congressional letters, litigation, etc, coming"
Dec 27, 2004 | 11:11 pm
#64
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: AA, WN RR
Posts: 3,122
Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much
PH1775 -- Great Handle, BTW!!
Could you possibley cite some of these cases and steer us in the direction of links? Using airport security as convenient chokepoints to search bags and people for all sorts of stuff not related to aviation security is really a hot button of mine. "Implied consent" and "in plain sight" doctrines aside, something in my gut really rubs me the wrong way about these practices. Were the one-way cash tickets key to the appeals, or were the opinions more broadly-based?
If a drug bust occurs at an airport based on a thorough investigation and search/arrest warrants, I've got no problem with that -- this is just good police work. But, "discovering" this stuff during airport screening and arresting/prosecuting someone is way out of bounds, IMO.
What's to prevent the slippery slope? Heck, I've read accounts of people being detained for carrying a large amount of cash on a domestic flight or detained for having more than one passport. I could envision the day when, for example, our laptops and CDs are searched for bootleg software or our reading material is searched to make sure the content does not violate local community standards.
Could you possibley cite some of these cases and steer us in the direction of links? Using airport security as convenient chokepoints to search bags and people for all sorts of stuff not related to aviation security is really a hot button of mine. "Implied consent" and "in plain sight" doctrines aside, something in my gut really rubs me the wrong way about these practices. Were the one-way cash tickets key to the appeals, or were the opinions more broadly-based?
If a drug bust occurs at an airport based on a thorough investigation and search/arrest warrants, I've got no problem with that -- this is just good police work. But, "discovering" this stuff during airport screening and arresting/prosecuting someone is way out of bounds, IMO.
What's to prevent the slippery slope? Heck, I've read accounts of people being detained for carrying a large amount of cash on a domestic flight or detained for having more than one passport. I could envision the day when, for example, our laptops and CDs are searched for bootleg software or our reading material is searched to make sure the content does not violate local community standards.