Tsa Advised Me That Theft Is Not Necessarily A Breach In Security
Mar 22, 2007, 5:53 pm
#32
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 398
Let's face it -- we have reached the height of silliness on this thread when we are discussing TSA screeners stealing nuclear weapons out of suitcases.
Still, if we are to go along that path, it is logical to assume that whoever was the proper owner of that suitcase was a bad guy. While the US government does, indeed, send nuclear weapons to various location both domestically and internationally, to the best of my knowledge it does not just check them in at the Delta counter at EWR.
Still, if we are to go along that path, it is logical to assume that whoever was the proper owner of that suitcase was a bad guy. While the US government does, indeed, send nuclear weapons to various location both domestically and internationally, to the best of my knowledge it does not just check them in at the Delta counter at EWR.
HOWEVER - The point of my post was NOT what was taken out but what might be put in.
In my opinion if it was indeed a theft or just poor handling this brings into question the integrity of the individual(s) involved and the integrety of the system as a viable deterent against terrorism.
Mar 22, 2007, 6:07 pm
#33
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 398
Theft is also a crime that involves moral turpitude, whether at the felony level or misdeameanor level (i.e. small value theft). Individuals in the airline industry that are involved in such crimes could be considered a security risk.
Was the theft a breach of security to the safety of an airplane? Probably not in itself, but it could be said the individual who comitted the theft, especially if a TSA employee, is a security risk. What else would such a person do for personal gain?
If it was not a TSA employee, it could be argued that the unauthorised opening and/or tamping with of luggage is a security breach.
Regardless of who stole the items, it is clearly wrong and there should be some accountability. In this case it looks like the TSA instead of a baggage handler. How about the TSA looking into who was handling luggage screening for the particular airline at the date/time this happened? I don't think that is an unreasonable request -- but the problem is the lack of accountability and even if a claim is made, I'd be surprised if the TSA investigates it. They will likely pay it -- at a reduced (depreciated) value or blame it on the airline which would then blame it on the TSA.
When the TSA started up, I had a checked suitcase that was screened by them and not only were a number of items missing from my luggage, but a number of items which were not mine were inserted. This was likely a result of careless or negligent handling during screening by the TSA and not theft -- but the airline which carried me ended up paying the claim for the missing items. Thankfully much of it was new and I had receipts, but it really bothered me that much of what was missing was obtained on a shopping trip & could not be replaced locally -- or could not be replaced locally at the same value.
Last but not least, while the items inserted into my luggage (someone elses belongings) did not affect the security of my flight --- the fact that items can easily be inserted into luggage because of the TSA and their procedures IS a security risk.
Was the theft a breach of security to the safety of an airplane? Probably not in itself, but it could be said the individual who comitted the theft, especially if a TSA employee, is a security risk. What else would such a person do for personal gain?
If it was not a TSA employee, it could be argued that the unauthorised opening and/or tamping with of luggage is a security breach.
Regardless of who stole the items, it is clearly wrong and there should be some accountability. In this case it looks like the TSA instead of a baggage handler. How about the TSA looking into who was handling luggage screening for the particular airline at the date/time this happened? I don't think that is an unreasonable request -- but the problem is the lack of accountability and even if a claim is made, I'd be surprised if the TSA investigates it. They will likely pay it -- at a reduced (depreciated) value or blame it on the airline which would then blame it on the TSA.
When the TSA started up, I had a checked suitcase that was screened by them and not only were a number of items missing from my luggage, but a number of items which were not mine were inserted. This was likely a result of careless or negligent handling during screening by the TSA and not theft -- but the airline which carried me ended up paying the claim for the missing items. Thankfully much of it was new and I had receipts, but it really bothered me that much of what was missing was obtained on a shopping trip & could not be replaced locally -- or could not be replaced locally at the same value.
Last but not least, while the items inserted into my luggage (someone elses belongings) did not affect the security of my flight --- the fact that items can easily be inserted into luggage because of the TSA and their procedures IS a security risk.
I had a similar situation about 3 years ago, although it involved the removal of work product from a checked bag so it was impossible to document the purchase value to the satisfaction of the TSA. Again, as it had no value to anyone else it was in my opinion, sloppy handling of my possessions.
So back across the country to Seattle we went to redo the survey, at a mere cost of $3000 including billable time. In trying to track down what happened I was advised by TSA Seattle that they do not maintain video oversight of the baggage screening area. Sorry!
Mar 22, 2007, 6:48 pm
#34
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 250
"MAKE NO PROVISION TO ENABLE EVIL"
There is NO EXCUSE for there NOT to be continuous video surveillance of the people and process of opening and "inspecting" of passenger luggage EXCEPT to facilitate an arranged non-accountability on the part of the airport, airlines and TSA for the whole process. WHO THEN are we to hold accountable for what contraband they may SAY they found in some suitcase. The passenger? I don't think so. He has no control of what could be inserted into his luggage after he checks it. It could actually have come from some other suitcase in their own admittedly sloppy inspection process.
I would venture to charge that the process seems to guarantee the pillagers....oops TSA inspectors are satisfied with a pittance of pay as long as they get to plunder the booty that passes through their stations to augment their salaries. No cameras TSA claims, capture their misdeeds or evidence of THEIR CRIME BUT I am sure, in court, there WILL be produced "video evidence (manufactured?) of them finding whatever contraband TPTB WANT to claim was found in some certain passenger's luggage, even if they have to "REINACT IT". The "powers that be" are happy with their "low overhead salaries", everybody but the traveling citizen is happy with the arrangement. It reminds me of grade school descriptions of life under Stalin and why we children should be happy to live in the USA where the citizens are not treated that way(back then).
There is NO EXCUSE for there NOT to be continuous video surveillance of the people and process of opening and "inspecting" of passenger luggage EXCEPT to facilitate an arranged non-accountability on the part of the airport, airlines and TSA for the whole process. WHO THEN are we to hold accountable for what contraband they may SAY they found in some suitcase. The passenger? I don't think so. He has no control of what could be inserted into his luggage after he checks it. It could actually have come from some other suitcase in their own admittedly sloppy inspection process.
I would venture to charge that the process seems to guarantee the pillagers....oops TSA inspectors are satisfied with a pittance of pay as long as they get to plunder the booty that passes through their stations to augment their salaries. No cameras TSA claims, capture their misdeeds or evidence of THEIR CRIME BUT I am sure, in court, there WILL be produced "video evidence (manufactured?) of them finding whatever contraband TPTB WANT to claim was found in some certain passenger's luggage, even if they have to "REINACT IT". The "powers that be" are happy with their "low overhead salaries", everybody but the traveling citizen is happy with the arrangement. It reminds me of grade school descriptions of life under Stalin and why we children should be happy to live in the USA where the citizens are not treated that way(back then).
Mar 23, 2007, 6:57 am
#35
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Paris
Posts: 577
Emphasis mine. Am I the only one who finds this comment disturbing? The fact that he admitted this happens "often" but in no way implies this is not the way things should be?
Mar 23, 2007, 7:47 am
#36
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
I support the idea of CCTV cameras at the checked baggage screening locations for many reasons. Firstly, I do believe it would inhibit theft (a determined thief will always find a way). However, I don't think theft by TSOs is as rampant as many in here claim. Or to put it another way, it is very difficult for ONE thief to be successful; it would require a number of people to agree and conspire. And I think it is very difficult for any theft to occur where the baggage is screened in the public lobby because it's in view of the general public, airline ticket agents and airline GSCs. Not saying impossible; just saying not as easy as some in here claim. In baggage screening locations behind the ticket counter; different story and that is where theft has a higher probability; again, if a couple people are in on it. I acknowledge that in any population, there's a percentage of those who will either decide to steal outright or who give in to the temptation. I don't condone it and have made it crystal clear at work that I will automatically jump into RANGER mode should I ever suspect any of my TSOs committing such an act.
However, there are many more reasons why I support having CCTV cameras, and the primary one is safety. The checked baggage screening locations are where a high percentage of on-the-job injuries occur. With the help of videotape, not only can first responders be dispatched more efficiently should an accident occur (we've had several incidents of screeners collapsing, having heart attacks or falling over a tripping hazard), but these injury claims can now be substantiated or verified more accurately. I suspect this would also cut down on the number of fraudulent on-the-job injury claims as well.
Furthermore, I think videotaping would help strengthen any cases where prohibited or dangerous items are found inside a bag. Nothing is more solid as testimony than a jury watching a videotape of a screener pulling the incriminating evidence out of a bag. Or, in the case where a passenger decides to get stupid and assault an officer, having it all caught on tape.
However, there are many more reasons why I support having CCTV cameras, and the primary one is safety. The checked baggage screening locations are where a high percentage of on-the-job injuries occur. With the help of videotape, not only can first responders be dispatched more efficiently should an accident occur (we've had several incidents of screeners collapsing, having heart attacks or falling over a tripping hazard), but these injury claims can now be substantiated or verified more accurately. I suspect this would also cut down on the number of fraudulent on-the-job injury claims as well.
Furthermore, I think videotaping would help strengthen any cases where prohibited or dangerous items are found inside a bag. Nothing is more solid as testimony than a jury watching a videotape of a screener pulling the incriminating evidence out of a bag. Or, in the case where a passenger decides to get stupid and assault an officer, having it all caught on tape.
Mar 24, 2007, 4:45 pm
#37
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ORD
Programs: CO PLT, HH DIA
Posts: 1,461
I support the idea of CCTV cameras at the checked baggage screening locations for many reasons. Firstly, I do believe it would inhibit theft (a determined thief will always find a way). However, I don't think theft by TSOs is as rampant as many in here claim. Or to put it another way, it is very difficult for ONE thief to be successful; it would require a number of people to agree and conspire. And I think it is very difficult for any theft to occur where the baggage is screened in the public lobby because it's in view of the general public, airline ticket agents and airline GSCs. Not saying impossible; just saying not as easy as some in here claim. In baggage screening locations behind the ticket counter; different story and that is where theft has a higher probability; again, if a couple people are in on it. I acknowledge that in any population, there's a percentage of those who will either decide to steal outright or who give in to the temptation. I don't condone it and have made it crystal clear at work that I will automatically jump into RANGER mode should I ever suspect any of my TSOs committing such an act.
However, there are many more reasons why I support having CCTV cameras, and the primary one is safety. The checked baggage screening locations are where a high percentage of on-the-job injuries occur. With the help of videotape, not only can first responders be dispatched more efficiently should an accident occur (we've had several incidents of screeners collapsing, having heart attacks or falling over a tripping hazard), but these injury claims can now be substantiated or verified more accurately. I suspect this would also cut down on the number of fraudulent on-the-job injury claims as well.
Furthermore, I think videotaping would help strengthen any cases where prohibited or dangerous items are found inside a bag. Nothing is more solid as testimony than a jury watching a videotape of a screener pulling the incriminating evidence out of a bag. Or, in the case where a passenger decides to get stupid and assault an officer, having it all caught on tape.
However, there are many more reasons why I support having CCTV cameras, and the primary one is safety. The checked baggage screening locations are where a high percentage of on-the-job injuries occur. With the help of videotape, not only can first responders be dispatched more efficiently should an accident occur (we've had several incidents of screeners collapsing, having heart attacks or falling over a tripping hazard), but these injury claims can now be substantiated or verified more accurately. I suspect this would also cut down on the number of fraudulent on-the-job injury claims as well.
Furthermore, I think videotaping would help strengthen any cases where prohibited or dangerous items are found inside a bag. Nothing is more solid as testimony than a jury watching a videotape of a screener pulling the incriminating evidence out of a bag. Or, in the case where a passenger decides to get stupid and assault an officer, having it all caught on tape.
I agree with Bart that TSO theft is not as rampant as by others, say for example baggage handlers. I also think that CCTV security cameras would be a great tool, but I would like to see the video warehoused at an off site data storage facility where local TSA employees do not have the ability to modify or delete it, only to look at it. I think the union baggage talent is the source of much more baggage problems than the TSA is. I'd also like to see the ability for a passenger to dispute what was said or what happened at the screening stations. Bart, how much easier would your job be if everyone could go into an anteroom, look at the tape from an incident that just went down, and decide what did and did not go right? Talk about a training tool. Here's where you screwed up, do it right the next time. Here's what the passenger really said, deal with it accordinaly. Also, AUDIO is desperately needed.
Hook these up via encrypted internet and have them viewable in real time off site, NOW you have some accountability! Both for passengers sore at the TSA and for the TSA to prove pax wrongdoing.
--PP