BigDogBart

Howdy to all fellow travellers, both frequent and occasional. . . .

I am a TSA officer, and have served the travelling public for nearly a year now. I chose this profession because service to others is much higher on my Maslow's pyramid than making boatloads of money. So far, my experience with TSA has been quite an eye-opener and I don't regret my career decision in the least. The majority of travellers I see on a daily basis are responsible, supportive and even a pleasure to work with.

I have reviewed quite a few of the posts on this website that relate to TSA and airport security, and with few exceptions I don't see much in the way of replies from the "other" side . . .i.e. TSA itself. This post is not intended to be all-inclusive or comprehensive, but hopefully helpful to those of you who find going through the security checkpoint an unpleasant experience.

Why are we screening you, the passengers, in the first place? The name of this forum says it best - safety and security. I will grant you, not all TSOs are equally effective in achieving these goals. Like any other organization one will find both good and bad workers in TSA. This does not negate the fact that TSA is dedicated to ensuring that a repeat of 9/11 never happens on U.S. soil again. Keeping that in mind, everything we do in the screening process is focused on security first, passenger flow second.

Yes, believe it or not, one of our primary goals is also getting passengers through the checkpoint as quickly as possible to ensure they board their planes on time. Every day we have to achieve a balance between protecting passengers and moving them through the line quickly and efficiently. Next time you are standing in the line and it slows down, observe WHY it has stopped. It isn't because the TSO is "pawing through" a passenger's bag, it is because the passenger had gels, liquids, or aerosols in their bag that needed to be removed. The TSO would love nothing more than to find nothing of interest in that bag and send the passenger on his or her way. It is frustrating to have to wait while bag checks are conducted (I know full well how it feels - I travel frequently too), but I would ask you not to direct your ire at the TSO doing his or her job but at your fellow passenger who either forgot or intentionally tried to "get over on the system" by bringing prohibited items through the checkpoint. While I am on this point, allow me to address another issue - the dreaded zip-top bag. This bag was DHS's way of allowing the travelling public to once again bring liquids through the checkpoint. I find it ironic that we seem to get more complaints about this little sandwich bag than any other issue. By putting your travel-size liquids in the bag and setting them out for the X-ray operator to see speeds up the process for YOU, because the operator sees liquids on the X-ray, looks down and sees the bag, and is able to quickly assess that bag and determine at a glance that the items are all of the proper size. Assuming that your bag doesn't have any other liquids, gels or aerosols inside, you will be quickly on your way with no delays. To be honest folks, if it were up to us, there would be NO liquids, gels or aerosols allowed through the checkpoint. This concession was made to make your travelling experience easier, not harder. Keep in mind too the whole reason that this restriction arose in the first place . . .terrorists in London who were planning to carry liquid explosives onto aircraft.

I mentioned pulling IDs out of the wallet. While this may seem like yet another annoying procedure, it is necessary for several reasons. First and foremost is to examine the ID for possible tampering or counterfeiting. I am not an expert in detecting forgeries, but I am able to see if a driver's license has been tampered with, or if it looks like it was printed on a home computer. I also have to check the expiration date, and many times the license is expired but has an extension sticker on the back. Larger airports have either contractors or volunteers who perform this security step, but many smaller airports like the one I work in does not, thus the need for TSA to perform this security step.

I saw a post mentioning missing locks on bags, and another one concerning checked baggage in general. I handle (and open) a large number of bags on a daily basis, and have only had a few examples where the lock needed to be cut. The proper procedure for dealing with locked bags is as follows:

TSA approved locks are opened with the corresponding key and relocked after the bag is screened. Non-TSA locks require us to contact the owner and either borrowing the key from them and returning it after screening and relocking the bag or having them unlock the bag if possible. Most airports have what is called an "in-line system" which sends checked bags down to a central screening area which is not accessible to the passengers, so the key-fetching method is required. If we are unable to locate the passenger, then the supervisor is called over to cut the lock. After screening the bag, the lock pieces are taped together and placed in the bag with a TSA notice. Cutting a lock is the absolute last option, and one that no TSO wants to exercise.

There are more issues I could cover, but I will save them for future posts. I look forward to serving you, my fellow travellers, as I endeavor to ensure all your trips are SAFE and smooth ones.

BigDogBart

bobob

Thanks for the press release Kip.

FWAAA

Welcome to Flyertalk and thanks for the press release.

LessO2

If safety and security is such a chief concern, then why don't you take a peek at cargo once in awhile?

Seems to me that would slow things down, would be deemed an inconvenience, and would cost money. And as we all know, capitalism has long trumped "security."


Don't take this as an attack....I'm curious as to your definition of "frequently?"



Interesting, because TSAers here have said the exact opposite about the liquid nonsense.

Further, your point contradicts what your beloved leader has said inmany photo-ops, that the reason for the baggie is to control the amount of liquids each passenger has (because we're all on the honor system and we would never combine liquids).

Not to mention you guys have no idea whether that bottle of Head & Shoulders contains shampoo or a liquid explosive.

You hit the mark in your post about "concession." Concession stands are the only reason we're allowed to bring liquids past the checkpoint. When the airports screamed they would lose revenue with no liquids, that when the TSA caved in. Again, Capitalism > "Security."





Funny, that's the bill of goods we were sold when this nonsense started.


Please. That's all about securing airline revenue.



Welcome to FT. Frankly put, you're about to get a baptismal by fire. Don't take things personally, as most of our ire is at policies, rogue screeners who choose to be difficult (then ruin it for everyone) and TSAers who truly don't knwo what we go through.

law dawg

You know, this would have been an excellent oppotunity to say "welcome aboard. I don't agree with a word you said and here's why - x,y,z. Nonetheless thanks for your input and an opposing view. Maybe we can all learn something."

But maybe that's setting the bar too high. [Edited by VPescado: potentially inflammatory statement removed] We don't want first time visitors to expect substantive exchanges of ideas, after all.

VPescado

Howdy Transportation Security Fans,

I just did some minor surgery on the thread. I removed a potentially inflammatory comment, two reactions to the aforementioned potentially inflammatory comment, and two reactions to the reactions to the potentially inflammatory comment. And I haven't even had breakfast yet.

So a reminder: Please play nice and don't use the wands to bash each other over the head.



Moving on, allow me to extend a hearty FT welcome to BigDogBart:

BigDogBart,

Welcome to our little community, as you have already noted there are not a lot of posters from your side of the x-ray machine.

I think that the vast majority of our readers will be glad to get another voice from your perspective - even those that disagree with many of the things the TSA does. There are a couple of reasons for this: you are in a position to explain to us what the rules truly are (there have been some reports of TSA agents giving out incorrect info - why should they be any different from all the other employees at the airport?), and also its not as much fun to debate something when everyone agrees.

Make no mistake however, you will encounter people who strongly and honestly disagree with your views. Some of these people will be quite intelligent and will make persuasive arguments why they believe that you are wrong. I suspect that you will find interacting with them to be intellectually stimulating - they may even get you to question some of your own beliefs about travel security.

You should however expect to be treated with respect and the volunteer moderators will do what we can to make sure that things don't get too out of control.

Again, Welcome to FlyerTalk!

VPescado
TS/S Forum Moderator

Superguy

If he's been lurking awhile like he said he has, he may have already read why many here think TSA is whacked and this is an attempt to explain why it's not.

Also to be noted, we'll need to becareful not to confuse BigDogBart with Bart.

Cholula

Folks, we've had to remove half the posts in this new thread due to name-calling, accusations and unfounded innuendo.

We'd ask that you refrain from posting to this thread unless you can remain on topic. And the topic is a TSO's perspective on airport safety.

Whether you agree or disagree with his observations, let's keep the debate to the issues being raised and not on the personalities involved.

Thanks for your cooperation.


___________________

Cholula

Travel Safety/Security Forum Moderator

Dovster

I would be interested in hearing your take on why it is important to know if the license is expired.

Unlike many other posters here, I can understand the need for positive identification of passengers. Without it, there is the possibility that someone on the no fly list can buy a ticket under a false name and then get on a plane.

What I don't follow is how the current validity of my driver's license (or any other form of identification) matters.

Let's assume that I fly JFK-FLL for a month, and in the middle of that month my license expires. On my way down there, the license is accepted as proof that I really am who I say I am. Does the fact that it expires before I fly back make me a different person?

An expired license merely means that I am no longer legally able to drive. It does not mean that I have become someone else.

justhere

The problem is that you and everyone else at the TSA seem to think that whole process makes a difference. It doesn't. Big deal that the items are the proper size. You've no idea what they contain. You've no idea what liquids I have in my pocket and, more importantly, you've no idea what liquids I've got waiting for me in the sterile area. Liquids that didn't even come through security.
Which they can still do if they are so inclined.

kaukau

Counter-intuitive as it may be, all the legal parameters require that a "valid ID" be presented for proof of anything. So it turns out that an expired ID is not accepted by anybody following the law, as proof of anything; not age, not identity; not address; nothing.

An expired ID does not insinuate that you "have become someone else." It just may not be accepted as "valid proof."

An example of this frustrating but legally imposed requirement, is that here in Maui County, as mandated by the Maui Liquor Commission, a bartender/bouncer/doorman may not legally accept an expired ID as proof of age, even though it's patently obvious that the presenter's age has not suddenly diminished to under 21.

Wally Bird

And do what ? Oh, yes a "dry run".

Possibly someone intending to get on a plane under a false name might even have had the foresight to avail himself of a false ID as well. Nah, them terrists is all too dumb.

dannyr

By anyone???

http://www.ct.gov/dmv/cwp/view.asp?a=805&q=244772

Secondary Documents: (Photocopies will not be accepted)

• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]

http://www.bmv.ohio.gov/driver_license/pd.htm

Primary Documents

• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]
• [*]

kaukau

Ah, you've found a couple of exceptions in Ohio and Connecticut. Excellent.

An expired ID may not be accepted in about 99% of the situations we find ourselves in. And don't forget: I'm not a proponent of anything; merely explaining that the vast majority of situations require a valid ID. I've got no dog in this fight: and thank you for bringing some exceptions to light!

VPescado

I suspect the reason for the the expired rule is due to the expectation that ID security features will continue to improve and by requiring a current ID, the presumably harder to duplicate features will be needed for a passable forgery.

However I personally think it is all irrelevant and only serves a purpose for revenue protection for the airlines (it make it harder to sell an airline ticket that you wont be using).

To demonstrate why it really serves no protection against a real terrorist (who is intelligent, well-informed and motivated), here is how the terrorist (even if he is on the no-fly list) can get onto practically any domestic flight:

Step one: He buys a ticket in someone else's name for whatever flight he is interested in (let's say SFO-JFK if he wants to make sure there is a lot of fuel on board). Ideally the name will correlate well to the terrorist's apparent ethnic background.

Step two: To really cover his tracks, He buys a second ticket in yet another name (that similarly matches his appearance) for a commuter flight operating out of the same terminal that departs at a similar time (some people suspect that small commuter flights get less scrutiny than transcons).

Step three: He prints boarding passes either at an internet cafe or at the kiosks at the airport.

Step four: He presents himself at security with the second ticket and no ID. He undergoes secondary but is admitted to the sterile area.

Step five: He tosses the ticket that he used to get through security, and uses the first one to get on the plane he wanted to get on.

He is on the plane he wants to be on, and its going to be decidedly hard to figure out who he is after the fact. He can also further obfuscate his trail by flying around on several tickets (each in a new name) before getting to his target flight. As long as he stays airside, switching identities is as simple as pulling a new boarding pass out of his pocket.