Originally Posted by Doppy

Which is precisely why increasing the number of people not suject to screening is a bad idea.

Especially when the basis for not subjecting someone to screening is a fakable ID card or a uniform that someone can buy on the Internet. Terrorists are constantly adapting to the evolving security situation. They've used fake uniforms (e.g. security service uniforms) and IDs, painted vehicles to look like company trucks, and are more and more planning to use women they arouse less suspicion.

Originally Posted by LessO2

The private companies were all just going by what The Government told them to do. It was the airlines lobbying for the minimal security requirements, plus The G issuing the directives on how and what to use for security procedures (all while having the 8/6/01 memo in hand). This is why I feel that the events on 9/11 happened because of both lax measures, enabled by both of the aforementioned parties.

With the exception of the addition of the CTX machines and the 'Puffers,' we're largely using the same technology and equipment to screen passengers. As Spiff has pointed out many times, the x-ray machines and the magnetometers won't pick up explosives. The TSA's bagel in picking up the 21 components reinforces what Spiff has said.

Turnover is always going to be an issue. Higher pay does reduce the turnover rate, but even the TSA is said to have about a 25% annual attrition rate.

And can you blame them? I don't get why someone would want to grope random strangers every day for a living. Nor do I understand why so many people would want to subject themselves to working at The Government's highest likelihood for on-the-job injuries (their physical fitness is another thread). Not to mention all the whining about management -- I certainly wouldn't want to work under those conditions.

I do see a day when the TSA goes away, though I cannot say when. The genesis would be when they work out the liability issue (airports don't want to get sued if and when another hijacking happens). The Government will always have the oversight in aviation security, but as Spiff mentions, extremely limited government oversight is the way to go.

Originally Posted by Spiff

Is there some reason the words "TEAM" and "MOBILE FORCE" are in capital letters? :confused:

What metric are you using to claim that the screening is better now that it was before? TSA and contracted-TSA like SFO are no better at finding guns and bombs than the screeners that were in place on September 10th 2001.

Originally Posted by Spiff

And it accomplishes NOTHING, except passenger harassment.

Explosives can be smuggled past the checkpoint at will. They are non-metallic and will not be detected by the WTMD. If someone has put them in their underpants or in a body cavity, the chance of detecting such explosives is zero.

The shoe carnival wastes everyones time and the civil liberties of the passengers while not increasing security at all.

I'd like to see those responsible for its implementation and maintenance suffer a humiliating dismissal and an uphill battle to ever collect benefits.

Originally Posted by LessO2

.

Turnover is always going to be an issue. Higher pay does reduce the turnover rate, but even the TSA is said to have about a 25% annual attrition rate.

And can you blame them? I don't get why someone would want to grope random strangers every day for a living. Nor do I understand why so many people would want to subject themselves to working at The Government's highest likelihood for on-the-job injuries (their physical fitness is another thread). Not to mention all the whining about management -- I certainly wouldn't want to work under those conditions.

I do see a day when the TSA goes away, though I cannot say when. The genesis would be when they work out the liability issue (airports don't want to get sued if and when another hijacking happens). The Government will always have the oversight in aviation security, but as Spiff mentions, extremely limited government oversight is the way to go.

Originally Posted by Superguy

Just curious, are you a native Spanish speaker? The "jejeje" instead of hehehe gives it away. :)

Originally Posted by SirFlysALot

I have to disagree with you there. The private companies were too cheap to do this if it were not required.

Originally Posted by powerplantop

I worked for a private company in Baghdad and our job site had one. It was used to screen people coming on to the site. It was fast and worked very well. About once a week someone would set the machine off. Usually for handling a weapon at home. So yes the machine could detect very small amounts of gun powder. Compare that to the process in place at most US airports.

So that every one is clear on what I am saying in Baghdad we had better screening without doing stupid stuff than the airports here in the US. And it was done by a private company. If this would have been turned over to the TSA I would have went home.

Originally Posted by carmelita

what metric?? well the constant training we get at SFO whether its with the x-ray machines or with the hand wands and patdowns.ect ect ect.everyday that I go to work we get debriefed about everything...we get tested contantly,and during our shifts when its down time we do train on each other to ensure that we know what we are doing..I do feel that we are better than before...at least our screening is more intense than it was before..and why TEAM is in caps becase we are TEAM SFO at San Francisco Inl Airport...

Originally Posted by carmelita

we constantly pull regular people for continuos screening even after no alarm at the wtmd and screen bags even though the xray did not call it..

Originally Posted by carmelita

we constantly pull regular people for continuos screening even after no alarm at the wtmd and screen bags even though the xray did not call it..

Originally Posted by carmelita

Yes superguy Im all blooded mexican! and very proud of it jejejejejejejeje
:) ^

Originally Posted by n5667

I'm not sure if contracting work done in Baghdad is quite the same as what would occur domestically at hundreds of airports...

Originally Posted by Spiff

Red team testing, however, has shown that the debriefings, the training and those disgusting pat-downs have not improved the ability to locate real, credible threats to aircraft: guns and bombs.

More "intense" screening is little more than passenger harassment. That's why so many of us can't wait to see the TSA permanently disbanded.

Originally Posted by carmelita

well we dont see it as harrassment most of do a good job of the screening...its all a process of getting on a safe plane..

so what do you suggest woud be the procedure of getting on a plane...when TSA is premanently disbanded.....