Rant: Stupid Rules and Inconsistent Enforcement
 

I accept that TSA has tons of stupid rules - some might look stupid to us but could have good reasons. However, it is the inconsistency in enforcing these stupid rules that prompted me to write this.

I travel about every 2-3 weeks and have gotten things down to a routine most of the time. When I passed through ORD T1 elite line this past Friday, I forgot to finish the water in a bottle of water. TSA would not let me finish the water there (there was probably 4 ounces left). The guy said either they confiscate the water or he has to walk me out of the security area and I have to start all over again.

Since I had time, hate stupid rules, was thirsty and wanted to recycle the bottle myself, I let him walk me out. So, that is at least 10 minutes of tax-payer money gone for the TSA guy to walk me out (need to go in and out of the exit).

When I came back through the line a few minutes later, I used the one next to it. The TSA guy confiscated my toothpaste. It was a long tube but almost finished - my emergency toothpaste in case my checked bag did not make it. Then they found a half full small bottle (hotel size) of lotion which I had not placed in the ziplock bag. Again, he said it has to be confiscated or I had to go back out and go through security again.

I think both of these are their rules. What ticks me off is that they were not enforced consistently - even on lines that are adjacent. I have done the same thing over the last many months with no problem.

The guy said there was some rule change as of Friday morning 1/12. Who knows - maybe in response to Bush's "New" strategy. I talked to the supervisor. He basically had the look that said "I agree with you but what can I do".

I am certainly not advocating returning the screening to the private sectors - a governmental agency needs to do this, IMHO. However, this kind of inefficient rules that waste resources and unnecessarily inconvenient travelers need to be reviewed. If they view themselves as a law-enforcement agency, then they need to get the people on their side and enforce rules consistently.

Wow, you sure had some "dangerous weapons" on you. What a waste of taxpayer money & bunch of stupid morons. Flying is now safer!

The stupid rules and inonsistent enforcement are about to get worse: Legistation has passed that allows the TSA gerbils to form a LABOR UNION, the only thing that could get them to work less and be less caring about customer service.

--PP

It's worse than that. These high-frequency, highly visible, resource consuming false positives eventually dull the ability to spot actual threats when they arise. It's the equivalent of repeating "Wolf!" dozens of times per hour. Even if the current processes were perfectly designed and perfectly implemented, such a high frequency of false positives would drive up the likelihood of operator error to the point where the overall system reliability would drop unacceptably.

This is the inherent problem: As the TSA expends valuable resources to expand security efforts by poorly implementing poorly designed measures, it actually decreases the effective level of security. And it is the effective level of security we should be concerned with, not the political level of security.

Well said. ^^

I do know that ORD misses liquids and gels, including bottles of water. But put the bottles in plain sight and it's asking for trouble. Put it in the carry-on and they may well miss it.

Evian: dangerous only in plain sight. :rolleyes:

Well since I've seen so much misinformation about this I'll put it out there. TSA has had a union since 2003 although we haven't had collective bargaining rights or full whistleblower protection like other gov't agencies. The AFGE has represented screeners in disiplinary actions and on capitol hill. So you see this is just an expansion of out union coverage.

Thanks for the info. From "without teeth" to "with teeth". :eek:

Which direction the whistleblower protection results in will be interesting.

you guys have it lucky it seems. Hows this for inconsistency When i was in London's Gatwick airport only some security lines asked people to remove their shoes while others let everyone pass with shoes on. Also the guy in front asked the screener if he needed to take his laptop out to which the screener hesistated and then said no. When it was my turn I asked the same question and was told my laptop had to come out.

UK airports have that "some off", "some not off" thing going. It's not just LGW, but also LHR. There's apparently some "system" involved in selection. In any event, the "random" shoe check isn't worth a whole lot, rather it's a waste.