Do you think TSA is getting out of control?
 

I noticed that lately, TSA seems to be kind of getting a bit out of control. I wonder why, as there hasn't been any threats to aviation lately.

Here's what I've observed:

2001: Private security - very, very strict after 9/11
2002: TSA took over, very strict too, more consisent, limited scope, IDs required
2003: Breast groping controvosy, a bit loosened up but still very strict, CAPPS II scandal
2004: Loosen up a bit
2005: " " "
2006: Loosen up considerably; tightens up somewhat again with the liquid ban
2007: Tightens up quite a bit; ID checks, SPOT gaining monetum, getting new uniforms resembling police officers' uniforms, longer lines, increased gate checks, proposing Secure Flight again
2008: ??? (REAL ID, but that's DHS's decision, not specifically TSA; and battery controvosy; but blame FAA & DOT, not TSA)

It seems to me that TSA is kind of returning to the old days when things were more strict. Compare that to 2005 and 2006 (until the liquid ban), when TSA was more neutral - didn't do ID checks, SPOT (a few airports only in sensitive areas), and was pretty much primarily only for screening passengers. Now, TSA seems to be becoming more strict like after 9/11 - but I could be wrong. Do you think TSA is more or less strict than when it was first implemented?

And, if you agree with my assessment, why do you think that is, especially if it's been a while since 9/11? What caused TSA to be more strict now?

All government programs start out with good intentions, but are by definition monopolies.

All monopolies will expand their influence.

That is why it is important to oppose any expansion of government power even it it makes a lot of sense at the time.

The TSA has been out of control since the first day it was implemented.

There's no accountability. Zero.

This disgusting agency should be permanently destroyed and its "leaders" severely punished.

OK, but what I'm actually asking here is if TSA has been becoming more or less out of control since its' inception. Have you noticed a certain pattern, Spiff?

What you are noticing could be a trickle down effect from the political games related to elections.

Power corrupts.

The TSO's have power over pax, and some of those TSO's (all the way up to Quip Hawley and Mike Jerkoff) seem to enjoy abusing their power.

With no accountably, they then feel more empowered to push it further.

It's going to take a lot of pushing back from pax, and the airlines to get congress to act and clean house.

And absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Spiff, I'm having to read between the lines here to see what you really mean. Please be clearer in your future posts.

The mandated "random" secondaries are no more and breast-fondling has been backed off. That's about the only leeway the TSA has ever given. Otherwise, it's been all about expanding their role to keep them relevant in the public's and Washington's eyes.

From the start, they have mastered their craft. And I'm not talking about bomb detection....they have proven not yet fully capable of detecting them. I'm talking about a government agency built on emotions (just after 9/11) and with rules and laws that leave it with no transparency or accountability. Their operations were clearly designed with Teflon in mind. Question anything and you'll be familiarized with SSI and/or a cop.

Their original, core mission was to prevent bombs and prohibited articles from making it airside. Once they realized that there's no PR ROI on doing that plus growing public discontent with the agency, it became clear they needed to go onto the PR offensive. Hence the creating of "TSA Mythbusters" and what seems to be every little prohibited item catch getting trumpeted on the TSA website.

All of this while many reports, and I fully believe there are plenty of other reports that have not been leaked, of incapability of detecting bombs or its components. Chertoff and Hawley like to pound in our heads that we could die if the liquids rule is not in place. Whereas slipping bomb components right in front of the eyes of the people whose sole job is to detect them, they get barely a slap on the wrist and "remedial training."

Think about it....if a pilot botched a landing because of his or her own error (no mechanical or weather reasons), do you think he or she would be employed by the airline anymore?

When (it's not a question of 'if') another attack happens with airlines, you can damn well be sure that what the TSA does now will be paltry in comparison. The one thing the TSA have perfected is fighting the last war.

I don't know that I think it's gotten worse. TSA cracks me up anyways. They are a joke. If any of us are silly enough to believe that they really give a hoot about us being safe on that airplane, we're going to be taken for a ride. Literally. It's all a big show to keep us flying. Or in other words, to keep us paying. If somebody wants to do something onboard a plane, they will find a way to do it. No amount of security is ever going to stop someone. 9/11 was all about manipulation anyway. BTW, Interesting speculation, Muddy, and probably right on.

What is TSA capable of doing that it isn't now? They already check our ID's with black lights, give SSSS to people who act suspiciously, report suspicious behavior, and now they're following FAA/DOT's directives to ban certain batteries in checked baggage. How could they become worse?

To be honest, I do believe that some...if not the majority....of the individual screeners feel they are doing something positive to protect us. And probably some of the TSA/DHS management feel the same way.

But those that are intellectually honest have to realize that there are so many holes in airport security that the average terrorist could drive a truck through them.

The question is why haven't we seen more reenactments of 9/11? Partly, perhaps, because it is a tad more difficult now to pull off what they did on 9/11.

But mostly, IMO, because they have changed their focus to other, softer targets. And it seems that they have infinite patience.

Like I said, they're masters at fighting the last war. Thus, if it's determined something got through in, say, a tube of lipstick, those will be banned. If something was smuggled in the hair of someone with big hair, look for "scalp secondaries."

Even if it's determined that something was enabled through the other many holes in the "security" setup (cargo, catering trucks, selective airport employee screening exemptions for starters), you can bet that you and I will take the brunt of the "fighting the last war" measures that would be enacted.

More. Much More.

Just look at your OP; Mission Creep

Firstly, OBL did publicly promise Bush no more attacks if he pulled US troops out of Saudi, so not entirely surprising since Bush complied with this demand in 2002, but more importantly the TSA approach is reflective of a complete and total failure to "think like a terrorist". None of the people who come up with these rules have ever tried to imagine (or better yet, create a formal war-gaming scenario) what they would do if they with a terrorist with extensive training in explosives, etc., who have just been given two years and a budget of 100K USD by OBL to go do some damage. What are they worried about, what challenges do they need to overcome to accomplish their mission? You would have to be a moron to believe it would be about finding a target -- there are endless choices. You would have to be a real moron to believe it would be about getting a bottle of evian past the TSA. Nothing the TSA or anyone has done could prevent another 7/7 or Atocha, and there is nothing imaginable that could be done -- as the movie V for Vendetta showed, even a total police state is vulnerable to a well planned and well thought through terror strategy. All the supposed "plots" that have been uncovered were being done by unbelievably clownish and amateurish idiots who did little more than talk big over the phone.

What I would like to know is why government authorities think they should not take away an unnecessary privilege like private automobiles even though they kill half a million people annually, but they do want to take away sacred, fundamental liberties to prevent terrorism, even though it kills only a few hundred annually?