Couldn't do that Spiff. If you deported them, it'd be a lost liberty, which now makes you deportable as well. You can't deport people for their political affiliation (Communist). Or for checking ID (cruel and unusual punishment). Where would the vicious cycle ever end?

I agree that it could be done with a much more reasonable budget, but I do not agree that it was done better before federalization. Coming through the checkpoint where I worked, you were lucky if one screener could speak the same language as the other. The pay was horrible because it was a contract private security company who won the lowest bid, and the thoroughness of the screening was horrible.

According to the famous 60 Minutes segment, bin Laden himself is not on the no-fly list. Since the TDCs/screeners are not checking against any database or list, there would be no reason to stop him.

Of course a screener might get an Eagle Eye award for noticing the name

As cliche as this sounds, then the terrorists win. Terrorists work by instilling fear in their target. When we have street inspections and roadblocks and massive airport lines for security with insanely small quantities of liquids, then we're in fear

Really? They did a better job on the Red Team tests than the current crews do. I don't care what language they speak as long as they can identify prohibited items and remove them from the passengers attempting to pass through. I believe that it was done quite well overall.


Tell that to the folks in Washington, DC who are now subject to "Papers, please" when they want to visit certain neighborhoods in their city.

As for OBL, it is not the TSA's role to find or detain him; that is a LEO role. If he has no weapons then he is not a threat to the safety of the air transport system. Lumping the TSA in with LEOs is a farce.

and something that an LEO, aka Scott, wouldn't want to do

Which part? The lumping or the apprehending? I'm assuming you mean the lumping.

Yup, pure cowardice. Airports are not an excuse for a crime dragnet. And the number of illegal/horrendous things being taken through an airport each day is miniscule. There is no valid excuse for any checks other than those that directly affect airport and airplane security.


Ohhhhh... 9/11. That sad, tired, pathetic excuse for destroying civil liberties rears its ugly head once again. I've said it before and I'll say it again:

Screw 9/11

Murderers who got lucky is no excuse for destroying liberty. Those who give into the terrorists are worse than cowards. Other acts of terrorism may be attempted but they will succeed only against cowards and people who do do not know what liberty is. Pathetic individuals who cling to safety at all costs will always be easy targets for terrorism, from the schoolyard bully to people with bombs.


No way. I will rally against the destruction of liberty and I will gladly throw cowards out of our nation or into prison. Get used to it or go live in North Korea. One way or another, this sick harassment will stop, and people are getting less and less choosy about the means used.

They will the first or second time that terrorists choose to blow up a shopping mall, apartment complex, or gridlocked highway intersection.

I remember folks saying that the President would never condone stuff like Watergate, etc. And I remember when the US took a leadership posture on protecting human rights against imprisonment w/o trial.

This very well could move into the streets. You already get searched going into some airport roads and garages, driving into some parking garages in major metro cities (sign at entrance to midtown NYC parking garage: "all vehicles entering will be searched"). ID checks are commonplace for major commercial buildings in NY and other places.

And the stage is set: drunk driving checkpoints are legal and done all the time, license and registration checkpoints are done all the time. Washington DC implemented a checkpoint for people entering the Trinidad neighborhood in the name of "preventing violence", there are CBP checkpoints inside the border. All appear to have been upheld.

So, yes, we're likely to see it after a non-transportation terror attack.

Correct. They will be called something else.

Agreed. After all, the security checkpoint wouldn't have prevented the 9/11 attacks even if it had been the TSA, because the flight deck doors would still be vulnerable and box cutters weren't prohibited. ID checks wouldn't have prevented the 9/11 attacks because the hijackers all had valid IDs and valid boarding passes (even if they had been examined with a blacklight & loupe)! The ban on liquids wouldn't have prevented the 9/11 terrorist attacks because of the fact that liquids played no role in an attack that had an actual possibility of being successful.

If the TSA clowns stopped checking ID and the BDOs went the way of the dodo, the TSA "nightmare" of "all flight operations at the world's busiest airport may have been halted in an effort to find this person" ... and "[h]undreds of flights would have been delayed and tens of thousands of travelers across the country would have been impacted" wouldn't have happened.

This "big catch" wouldn't have disrupted operations if the TSA scrapped it's "big catch" mentality.

Was the passenger a terrorist? If so, we'd be hearing all about this "big catch" on the evening news and exposes on the person and their associates.

This TSA story is playing to the part of America that has been subjected to "wussification" and still takes government propaganda as being truth.

Give me location & dates. If there were certain instances where private/contract security did better, it was few and far between, or the report was buffed up. I have seen from personal observation, not read it in various articles from someone looking to make a buck.

Such checkpoints were conducted way before 9/11 occurred.

This is where you and I will always disagree. As far as cowardice is concerned, feel free to come down and ride anytime. Not sure what line of work you are into, but unless it is public safety on any level (whether city/county/airport PD, EMS, Fire or even security), just keep living your world and I will keep living mine. From volunteering with a squad and cutting people out of cars, to my paid job as a LEO, FF/EMT-IV, I go to bed happy and with a clean conscious, and I know my children and many others are proud of what I do. Although there are things I also disagree with concerning TSAs role and some of their practices, it is not enough to bear arms and go "anti-government" on them. I think there are a few million Americans that feel the same way. There seems to be only a handful of your kind and this forum is where you want to vent. Fine with me, it's your right, but as a moderator of the forum, calling people cowards because they do not express the same opinion as you is childish, and shows a lack of maturity on your part.

I would like to think that this country is trying to use preparation and prevention to combat terrorism. If you are such a wizard in keeping the terrorists from plotting their crimes and succeeding without eliminating all of "our liberties", feel free to become a senator, head of DHS, or even President. Otherwise all your ideas to combat those who hate the US don't do much good now do they? So you have to show ID, take your shoes off, and carry travel containers of shampoo & toothpaste, wow, I feel like I don't have any liberties at all now.

What you call "harassment" many people feel is a small price to pay to be able to fly. It is not going to stop, so I would bet you dinner that you would probably end up renting a car before I move to North Korea.

In or out of the Terminal, I apprehend folks quite often, and NO they are not photographers. I'm sure someone would try to throw that line in there. Believe it or not (either way I don't care), DUI arrests, Domestics, child neglect/abuse/sexual battery, you name it, I've arrested for it. Aside from that, I've also fought some fires and helped save a life or two from cardiac arrest, stroke, and insulin shock. It's a great job and I get to wear several hats. Can't beat it.

There just aren't as many terrorists intent upon attacking US aviation targets inside the US as DHS and DHS-TSA tries to pretend there are.

Airports are a pretty stupid place to try to try to find terrorists intent upon killing, wounding or capturing civilians.

If it is going to be a terrorist action against an airport, I would say it would be someone running (or driving) through the doors with explosives ready to detonate. I do like to think that most of what TSA is trying to do is thorough screening to keep folks off of aircraft with dangerous items and/or weapons. You would be surprised at the amount of passengers that still come through the checkpoint with firearms. Most of the time it was those who were law-abiding and forgot, but that also concerns me. If they are responsible enough to obtain a carry-permit, then you would think they would be smart enough to know the location of any and all weapons they own. There has been an occasion where the weapon that came through was in the possession of a convicted felon as well. I cannot go into specifics, but we even had a case of a pilot who had been removed from the FDO program attempting to use a fake FDO identification.

Terrorists have to get from point A to B quickly and the quickest way is through air travel, obviously from one country to the next. I assume that this is the reasoning behind some of TSAs newer policies (BDOs, ID policies, etc).

Overall, I just believe the TSAs good policies outweigh the bad. They do have some folks that have no business being employed with them, and hopefully they work harder at addressing it. As time (and supervision) changes, hopefully things will be analyzed more and there are a few changes. Until then, I still have no issues flying.