I know this topic has been beaten to death here, but I just had to write about a new low. Please skip the rest of this post .

I had just flown in to OAK, was on my way to a meeting, and was planning on flying out that same evening on another airline. I went to the second airline's customer service desk, airside and was issued a boarding pass with, you guessed it, SSSS. This is dumb. The agent escorted me to the closest TSA checkpoint where they wanted to screen me then and there. Since I had a meeting to go to, I asked if we could do the screening on my return to the airport and they agreed. This is idotic. I promptly walked out of the secure area and disposed of all of my prohibited articles (just kidding).

On the way back, I again had a lovely SSSS on my boarding pass indicating that I had pissed off the computer at airline #2. While I was waiting to go through the WTMD, the guy in front of me objected to removing his metal-free shoes. When told he would have additional screening if he refused, he did remove them and send them through the X-Ray. "Since you questioned the system, you will have additional screening" said the screener (direct quote). Usually the retaliatory screening is at least a little subtle. The guy was, understandably pretty steamed. I encouraged him to fill out a complaint form and he did, but the supervisor (lead screener, whatever) didn't seem to be sympathetic and the guy wasn't too confident that anyone would read his complaint. Another clear case of abuse of authority and total waste of taxpayer resources. Welcome to flying circa 2005.

Michael

Was he being sarcastic?

Regardless, he may have been required to get additional screening regardless due to how deep the soles were, after all...

Read the post again. The guy did cave in and put his shoes in the x-ray.

Passenger removed his shoes for X-ray screening. However, he insolently displayed the temerity to question TSA screening of his shoes. Secondary screening will teach that passenger to question the wisdom of TSA.

Seriously, we are witnessing the evisceration of the First and Fourth Amendments. 1789-2005, RIP.

Ahhhh, so... sorry 'bout that.

I think it's about time for the GAO to take ownership of the TSA ombudsman office and begin recruiting people for 'mystery shopper' roles to document the screening experience, from adherence to SOP down to customer service/treatment.

The GAO should, through the ombudsman/compliance office, have a line-item path to suspend or terminate the employment of any TSA employee who is found to wilfully violate SOP, or mistreat/threaten/harass customers, whether that person is a screener or the FSD.

Enough is enough.

Love it!!! ^ ^ ^

Ditto

Flying is not a right, it is a privilage that you choose to do. If you dont like security drive or ride a boat.

Don't be too sure about making such a blanket statement. The right to travel and petition the government is embedded within our Constitution. Courts have not made the type of statement about flying like with driving, which is a privilege.

So you're saying we should just be quiet and obey? Is this to help you feel safer? Sorry, I'm not going to do that.

These complaints are not about having security - they are about how many employees of the TSA treat their customers, consider themselves as soldiers in some war, use their authority to abuse, harass or threaten customers, ignore procedures and standards written by their own agency - and how this agency has rolled out a long list of procedures which do nothing to improve aviation security, but are just for 'show and tell, to appease a 'chicken little' public mentality.

Great idea, but it would take Congress to direct this, because nobody at the TSA believes there is a problem. After all, we're screened with dignity and respect -- just ask them.

If the GAO wants to pay me to be a "mystery shopper" and test the TSA's compliance with their own rules, I'll sign up right here and now!

The GAO could simply tell its "mystery shoppers" what to do (in terms of clothes, shoes, items to try bringing through, the process they want followed, etc.) and give authorization--so you don't get arrested when they find the "artfully concealed" knife or lighter in your bag, etc.

It sounds like a really good plan to me... outside investigation of the TSA, for both effectiveness and adherence to policies & polite, efficient screening.

Given that this is a sweeps period, I would love to see television stations perform such expose`s with their consumer reporters. They would have a First Amendment argument to justify their activities. This may show the general public how out of control TSA is and what a tiny return on investment we are receiving for $5 billion per year.

There are a few things to bear in mind...

Generally when you fly on a commercial airliner, you're flying on a privately owned jet providing a for profit service - I'm not sure you're rights extend into this field.

Also, isn't there some sort of sneaking national security class going on so the government can temporarily deny you some of your constitutional rights when undergoing a security check that you volunteered yourself for?