For what it's worth, most abductions are by a biological parent as part of a custody dispute or the boyfriend of a single mother.

http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/doc..._nonfamily.pdf

That doesn't make child abduction right, but it does speak to the invasive measures you would have to take to effectively screen for these situations.

Welcome to FT. :)

You think my post constitutes "a viper pit"? How so?

Thank you for providing the cite. I suspect, though, that the "anything for the children" crowd will still try to justify this ludicrous TSA PR move on that ground.

My female grey tabby is too smart to get caught in a tree (yes, she climbs them regularly!)

Sounds like a purrfect candidate.

She doesn't need the TSA's "services", doesn't want the TSA's "services", but with a tree-climbing tax, we can prevent her from enjoying her tree climbing experiences while making her absolutely no safer.

Yes, but -- Think of the birds!!! :D

I dare any TSO to try to pat her down...

Especially since she's a furriner. And everybody knows all potential terrorists are furriners.

I'm sure that's the case, but in between those there are real kidnappings with kids snatched from their yards or on the street by unknown suspects. There may be years in the Bay Area we don't have any child abductions at all ( I can't think of one in the last year) but those are the ones that the word needs to get out as quickly as possible, and to as many people as possible.

I have no issue with child abductions on the freeway signs in these cases, as infrequent as they are.

Even if they result in accidents that kill or injure other children, as well as adults?

I don't know if that is happening on real child abductions, as infrequent as they are. I would hope people are driving cautiously on Bay Area freeways. I see the signs in my area go off for a whole range of things from lane closures to construction to accidents. Should CALTANS not announce those, either, and just take down the signs, if reading them might result in accidents?

I'm sure there are.

But since you are in law enforcement, do me this. Identify a single one that has happened anywhere in the US in the past 5 years that involved a commercially scheduled airline flight.

If you really want to attack the problem, train the convenience store clerks.

It's hard to imagine a "security" effort that would have less positive impact than involving the TSA. Other than, of course, most of the other efforts the TSA has already implemented in pursuit of its core mission.

Asking a failure to pursue an infrequent, non-core security objective decreases the likelihood the primary mission will be achieved.

Lehava, with all due respect, this is a great example of emotion triumphing over logic. Bus drivers and taxicab drivers do not have the power to stop you going from where you want to go; all they can do is to inform the appropriate authorities. TSA screeners have the power to disrupt your plans by delaying you for whatever reason. Given how awful many of them are at their jobs, would you want to grant them additional powers?

tom911, as much as I respect you (and I am cognizant of your law enforcement background), I think you are way off base on this.

If the screeners, as private citizens, want to take note of a child that may or may not fit an Amber alert description, and report the "sighting" to a real LEO, well and good. It's just extra pairs of eyes "looking out for the kids." But when you give them the power to stop parents and children from boarding flights, given their stellar performance over the last few years, you are opening up a huge can of worms.

I'm fine with that. Again, just another set of eyes when a child has been kidnapped.

It's hard to find good stats on child kidnappings. I looked on the FBI website and couldn't find any hard numbers, let alone proving or disproving that any of those kidnappings involved air travel. That air travel component is just not tracked on any reports I've ever seen for any type of crime. I'll speculate that it might be common with parental abductions (and look at the numbers of those versus kidnappings--204,000 vs 115), but there might not even be one case with an actual child kidnapping (again, keep in mind there are not a lot of child kidnappings to start with).

I did find some stats on the NCMEC web site that cites a 2002 report where there were 115 child kidnappings nationwide, so about 1 every 3 days, and if you figure 10% of the nation's polulation is in CA, maybe 1 every 30 days in CA, so you would not be talking a lot of Amber Alerts for actual child kidnappings.

The U.S. Department of Justice reports

797,500 children (younger than 18) were reported missing in a one-year period of time studied resulting in an average of 2,185 children being reported missing each day.

203,900 children were the victims of family abductions.

58,200 children were the victims of non-family abductions.

115 children were the victims of “stereotypical” kidnapping. (These crimes involve someone the child does not know or someone of slight acquaintance, who holds the child overnight, transports the child 50 miles or more, kills the child, demands ransom, or intends to keep the child permanently.)

http://www.missingkids.com/missingki...&PageId=2810#1

That group of 115 is the one I'm most concerned about (kidnap victims), and want to see the word get out to as many people as possible.

Not any longer. After 32 years, I'm retired :)

As a parent of three (thankfully all grown), I couldn't agree more. What I disagree with is giving the TSA more implicit special powers in this regard than ordinary citizens have. Reporting, yes; arresting or detaining, no.