Agreed. Tell it to the airlines. The agents at the ticket counter are empowered to make the exemption. Often, they do not. So we're stuck having to screen them.

And of course, when called on it, they blame it on TSA.

A viscious circle 'tis.

Also, PatrickHenry1775 you call the SSSS Kabuki drama, an entertaining show, but not real security. I posit it isn't entertaining, either. Giving gate ticket agents empowerment to force SSSS upon hapless PAX's is a nightmare of mismanagement and dissociative thinking in the first place.

Entertaining?

"...we are (damn well) not amused..."

(in best Ed McMahon drunk voice) "You are correct, sir, Yes!!!"

Some of us who go throught the charade frequently look at the whole performance as Kabuki theater in an attempt to assign some meaning to the performance. Strictly speaking, this is not entertainment, especially when $5 billion per year is spent on this endeavor. No matter who assigns SSSS, and I think joint and several liability between the national government and the traveler's airline should apply, this farce does little if nothing to ensure safety for the public, but sure wastes our tax dollars.

As I stated earlier, if a passenger is considered a risk, then screening at the gate is an exercise in futility, because the passenger has likely been in the "sterile area" for an extended period of time. During that time, if that passenger was actually a terrorist, he/she would have had sufficient time to secrete a dangerous instrument or weapon so that a confederate not designated SSSS could retrieve the object and carry it aboard the flight. Thus, gate screening of a passenger designated SSSS is only a "feel-good" measure.

The geniuses on the 9/11 Commission should not have spent time on "SSSS" designation. Rather, they should have addressed Able Danger and the wall that apparently prevented military assets from notifying civilian law enforcement and other agencies that terrorists were training in the United States.

Gee, so what's your opinion of "reverse gate screening?"

What, pray tell, is "reverse gate screening?"

"Reverse Gate Screening" is when passengers randomly select a dozen TSA employees to be patted down. I actually carry my own mat with feet marks on it. Be sure to thank the TSA for their cooperation when you're done.

No really...

I think that Eyecue is speaking of the bizarre technique of screening passengers after their flight is complete. This occurs when a breach is discovered but the flight has departed... upon arrival at the next airport, passengers must re-clear security, even if they're not actually going to be flying any more that day.

What would happen if one refused to cooperate with "reverse screening"? If you're finished flying for the day, the TSA certainly can't try to intimidate you with the "you'll miss your flight" threat.

I do not understand the logic behind reverse screening. Seems to me that the logical thing to do is to escort all arriving passengers out of the terminal directly. That way, those who have arrived at their final destination are free to leave; those who have a connecting flight will need to process through the security checkpoint. Even so, seems to me that it's closing the barn door after the horse has left.

We've actually discussed this from a legal standpoint on this board already. The TSA's signs always state that one's property is subject to search at ANY time.

As I understand the law, one consents to any and all TSA searches just by passing through the WTMD once. Like it or not, that's how it's interpreted.

I am stunned that the TSA continues to spend its money screening passengers who are done flying. I cannot fathom WHY they would bother with the ridiculous time and expense of screening arriving international passengers who are only going to ground transportation. This is the case in Cincinnati, Atlanta, and other airports. It's so wasteful. And I'm sure that there is a reasonable way to redesign the arrivals area with a bus to landside.

There is nothing worse than arriving after an 8 or 9 hour flight, only to wait in line for 25 minutes for unnecessary security screening.

The same is true of "reverse" screening. It's a waste of time and personnel. I fail to see any logic behind it.

Well, I don't know what the legal controversy is. It is plainly obvious that you are about to walk through a metal detector. You clearly understand that in order to board the plane, you have to first pass through a metal detector (and submit your property for x-ray). My point here is that once you step inside the metal detector, you are voluntarily submitting yourself to the screening process. Now, do you have a choice not to do that? Certainly. But then again, you're not going to get on that plane. Does this mean that you are being forced to submit to security? Not at all. In this day and age, when you purchase your ticket, you do so with the knowledge that airport security screening comes with the territory. I refuse to believe that there's anyone today who doesn't understand this fundamental point. They may not understand the nuances and other aspects of airport security screening which may not make sense (such as selectee screening, the shoe screening policy and certain items being prohibited), but it should not be a surprise that you have to undergo security screening before you're allowed to board a commercial airliner.

Not sure what you mean about arriving international passengers. I don't think it's TSA who screens them. It might be Customs, who does so for a different purpose and mission scope. Could be wrong, but TSA only screens outgoing passengers. However, we strongly agree on reverse screening. Easier to just escort arrivals who weren't screened properly directly to the exit and re-screen only those who are making connections as they re-enter the sterile area through the checkpoint.

To date, my travel has been exclusively domestic, so I do not have any experience with Customs. IMHO, security screening for American citizens should be very brief - a fringe benefit of being an American. Citizenship proved by passport.

As far as domestic flights, reverse gate screening has to be the most asinine policy from an agency that has promulgated and impleted quite a few asinine policies. "Closing the barn door after the horse has escaped" is a rather mild description. If one has a connecting flight, then like Bart said, back through main security checkpoint. If one has reached one's destination, then let the person go. Isn't the objective to make sure that nothing prohibited gets onto the plane? Once the passenger is off the plane, TSA's mission is supposed to be over. Or is this mission creep, toward an airport and environs law enforcement agency?

I might agree with you, but let's remember for a moment that until 9/11, the most catastrophic act of terrorism on American soil was the work of....white, protestant Americans.

We can add the Unibomber to that list. We can also had the legions of white supremists pledged to overthrow the US government violently and create a new order in America...and for what it's worth, let's toss in all those crazy Montana woodsman who range from the tax evaders to the violent armed bands who have done battle with the government already - any of whom are quite capable of and willing to attack and destroy instruments of government authority.

It's a sad reflection of a policy that is geared towards a zero-defects, risk-avoidance philosophy of security rather than a common sense, risk-management approach. As I've criticized previously, TSA hired "experienced" security personnel into its management structure without understanding the entire spectrum of security philosophies. And a vast majority of security personnel are mired in a zero-risk management strategy. Don't ask me what it will take to shake this paradigm. Seems that TSA is in a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation. While some in here welcomed the proposal of easing up on some of the items currently prohibited as carry-on, others are already attacking the agency for forgetting about the atrocities of 9/11 and abandoning its charter. I agree with some of the proposed changes. Don't get me wrong. I'm just pointing out how the fickle opinions of public criticism can make TSA gun shy (no pun intended) whenever it appears to be floating towards risk management. Believe it or not, even with idiotic policies such as reverse screening and no-fly lists, it's easier to tolerate the criticism that comes with those policies than it is to assume the risks that come from mitigating certain threats with a more common sense approach.

Bart, it actually is the TSA.

In Atlanta, Cincinnati, and a few other airports, International Passengers arrive at a midfield location. The exit from Customs and Immigration is in a sterile concourse. One must pass through the sterile concourse to get to the airport exit.

Since passengers have had access to their checked baggage during Customs, ALL passengers must pass through TSA screening--even if they're home already and just trying to leave the airport.

There is no shuttle bus, no secured way of taking non-transit passengers directly to the Landside area.

It's really stupid.