|
I can see your point Mike but with explosives I think they did the right thing by shutting down. If I was in charge, and I believed a Grenade was in someone’s luggage, I would not have taken any chances.
Now the situation with pp is a different story. They should have had you sit in a chair PP and taken your shoes off for you, and then put them back on. That is what I would have done. Semper Fi, Bob |
Originally Posted by USMCSS
(Post 10429847)
FWAAA; I appreciate your comments.
I can tell you this; as stated, I was a former Correctional Officer and Marine, you are insinuating that because of that service, I would treat people unfairly and I take offense to that. Professional former Marines with common sense are exactly what the TSA needs. I guarantee that the TSO’s that you come in contact with that treat you with respect were probably prior Military; most of those guys know their place with the TSA; they’ve done, and I use the word you used, Hero stuff already, and probably didn’t join the TSA to boost their ego. Please don't take offense, as none was intended. What I see (as former military myself) is that too many of the screeners issue orders to passengers like Sgt Carter screaming to Gomer. THAT's the big problem. Military officers have perfected issuing orders - and that's what we have at the TSA right now. The top issues orders and each level of command re-issues orders. Finally, we get the screeners yelling orders at us. It's one thing to bark orders at subordinates. It's quite another to bark orders at non-subordinates and then to turn around and whine about the lack of respect from the abused passengers. You mentioned in an earlier post that you "visit airports often" but that you don't travel as much as some here. Ever been to the UK? Other cities in Europe? Tokyo? Singapore? Chile? Agentina? Brazil? In none of those countries have I encountered airport screeners acting like they do here. They're quiet, unobtrusive, and almost apologetic when they have to conduct any sort of secondary screening. And I've never seen anything that looks like the retaliatory secondary screenings conducted by the TSA. Your expertise is in control. Command and control. I didn't insinuate that you'd treat people unfairly. I'm very confident you'd treat people the way the current batch of ex-miltary, ex-cops, ex-prison guards currently treat us. They don't treat us "unfairly." They treat us poorly far too often. And that we don't need. |
Originally Posted by VideoPaul
(Post 10429991)
Bob,
Thank you for being a part of this country's defense through the beloved Corps. You did a job few want to do. Welcome to FT! I have noticed, especially in the last two years or so, some improvement in the average competence (not to mention basic manguage skills) of the TSO's as a whole. When the TSA first started it was the largest assemblage of the hard-core unemployable and gum-cracking, barely literate flotsam that I had ever seen. I usually hear TSO's cracking their gum and complaining about how unfair their schedules are and whining about how long it is until thier next break once a trip, it used to be every time I passed through a check point, so a 75% reduction in that by my entirely unscientific observation. You are entirely correct that former military and law enforcement is exactly what the TSA needs. We're not at the low point of the TSA where the answer to a question I asked one of the Phi-beta-kappa members at EWR terminal "A" was "I not dem, dey nah me!" but there is still so much of the original talent, combined with generally incompetent leadership, that the TSA definitely has a long way to go. --Paul |
Originally Posted by FWAAA
(Post 10430073)
I'm not just insinuating - I'm confidently asserting. :)
Please don't take offense, as none was intended. What I see (as former military myself) is that too many of the screeners issue orders to passengers like Sgt Carter screaming to Gomer. THAT's the big problem. Military officers have perfected issuing orders - and that's what we have at the TSA right now. The top issues orders and each level of command re-issues orders. Finally, we get the screeners yelling orders at us. It's one thing to bark orders at subordinates. It's quite another to bark orders at non-subordinates and then to turn around and whine about the lack of respect from the abused passengers. You mentioned in an earlier post that you "visit airports often" but that you don't travel as much as some here. Ever been to the UK? Other cities in Europe? Tokyo? Singapore? Chile? Agentina? Brazil? In none of those countries have I encountered airport screeners acting like they do here. They're quiet, unobtrusive, and almost apologetic when they have to conduct any sort of secondary screening. And I've never seen anything that looks like the retaliatory secondary screenings conducted by the TSA. Your expertise is in control. Command and control. I didn't insinuate that you'd treat people unfairly. I'm very confident you'd treat people the way the current batch of ex-miltary, ex-cops, ex-prison guards currently treat us. They don't treat us "unfairly." They treat us poorly far too often. And that we don't need. Just more reason why I am glad I made the decision not to join the TSA. If I had to bark orders at innocent people, I would quit. I do remember a few times seeing guys barking orders and thought they looked like a joke. Maybe someone on this forum from TSA can confirm whether or not it is TSA policy to bark orders at the Flyer? The only time I have been overseas was through the Military so no, I haven't seen how other countries airports operate. Again it all falls on the TSA higher ups; if they can make the TSO's bark orders, they can also make them treat people with respect and that is where I think prior Professional Military Personnel would do a great job. Semper Fi, Bob |
Funny thing about airport security and Flyertalk. Flyertalk began in May, 1998 and after searching, I was unable to find any significant complaint posted anywhere on this site about US airport security unitil the second week of September, 2001. Norm Mineta had a problem with private airport security and after numerous airport shutdowns following the discovery of prohibited items and checkpoint screwups, he convinced enough people that a nationalized screening force was necessary. Things have rapidly gone downhill ever since November 19, 2001.
I'm not anti-airport security. I'm anti-Mineta/Chertoff/Hawley pretend airport security. And all of the loyal foot soldiers who happily implement their nonsense. Just doin' their job. Bob would no doubt be a kind, benevolent, polite airport screener. He wouldn't take delight in taking away water in August or baby medicine from young mothers like some other former military screeners. But so far, the TSA, laden with war heroes and ex-cops, hasn't turned out that way. |
Originally Posted by FWAAA
(Post 10430073)
Please don't take offense, as none was intended. What I see (as former military myself) is that too many of the screeners issue orders to passengers like Sgt Carter screaming to Gomer. THAT's the big problem. Military officers have perfected issuing orders - and that's what we have at the TSA right now. The top issues orders and each level of command re-issues orders. Finally, we get the screeners yelling orders at us.
In the haste of putting together the TSA it seems clear that a quasi-military model was adopted. I think that direction was wrong-headed. Civilian security should be conducted by civilians using civil laws and civil practices. It takes a long time and considerable effort for an ex-soldier, ex-cop, ex-guard etc. to shed the mindset of regimentation, obedience and adherence. Many never do, they just carry it forward to their next job. Even worse are the wannabes who are not ex-anything but wish they had been. Far too many of both types in the TSA screening force and yet the TSA still seemingly believes these are the very type of candidates they want. No. I'm a civilian, I'm not under military jurisdiction. And I shouldn't be just to board a civil airliner. |
The OP implores us to "Just stop and think for one second" and discusses the jetBlue terminal clearance due to the fake grenade.
I have no issues with the TSA stopping fake grenades. I do think that if anyone at the TSA were to Just stop and think for one second, they might have concluded that emptying the entire terminal was not warranted. Emptying the entire terminal and re-screening everyone was a tremendous waste of time and money. There's simply no reason that a grenade (even if real) at a checkpoint (don't know if it was carryon or checked bag) calls for emptying the entire terminal. If it blew up it simply wouldn't harm anyone more than x feet away. If anything, it places the passengers at greater risk of a secondary attack at the curb. Everyone who has studied terrorist behaviour know this. Anyone for whom "risk management" is a familar term know this. So clear a safe perimeter. But emptying an entire airport terminal? All you've done is tell the terrorists that they can make everyone dance and spend $$$ by showing up at the airport with fake grenades in checked bags. Sorta the dimbulb nonsense of taking every phoned-in bomb threat seriously, like it was the real thing. Terrorists in the USA don't phone in bomb threats. When idiots are in charge of security, we don't get security. OP: Just stop and think for one second, please. :) |
Originally Posted by Cee
(Post 10429987)
"Oh yeah, my paperweight. Don't worry about it. It is a fake grenade....trust me."
It's about the totality of the situation, not if someone "looks like a terrorist." Where's the positive ETD swab on the bag to back up the assumption that it contains explosives? How credible is their explanation about the item? I can give TSA a pass on freaking out at the replica grenades, but not on the golf-ball trackers or laptops. That TSA and the bomb squads were working together to destroy the private property of passengers after it had been cleared, but out of the ever-important "abundance of caution" is absurd. That they then refused to compensate the victims is even more absurd. |
Originally Posted by FWAAA
(Post 10430376)
The OP implores us to "Just stop and think for one second" and discusses the jetBlue terminal clearance due to the fake grenade.
I have no issues with the TSA stopping fake grenades. I do think that if anyone at the TSA were to Just stop and think for one second, they might have concluded that emptying the entire terminal was not warranted. Emptying the entire terminal and re-screening everyone was a tremendous waste of time and money. There's simply no reason that a grenade (even if real) at a checkpoint (don't know if it was carryon or checked bag) calls for emptying the entire terminal. If it blew up it simply wouldn't harm anyone more than x feet away. If anything, it places the passengers at greater risk of a secondary attack at the curb. Everyone who has studied terrorist behaviour know this. Anyone for whom "risk management" is a familar term know this. So clear a safe perimeter. But emptying an entire airport terminal? All you've done is tell the terrorists that they can make everyone dance and spend $$$ by showing up at the airport with fake grenades in checked bags. Sorta the dimbulb nonsense of taking every phoned-in bomb threat seriously, like it was the real thing. Terrorists in the USA don't phone in bomb threats. When idiots are in charge of security, we don't get security. OP: Just stop and think for one second, please. :) When a dam Grenade goes off and kills someone that was behind the 90 foot mark the TSA decided to use so they would not inconvenience anyone, you would be in an up roar that they didn't do more to protect people. And god help it if it was someone you know. They did the right thing and that's all there is to it. The other stuff you are arguing is worth it; this is ridiculous! My god, people had to go through security again instead of possibly getting their dam head blown off. And people that bring fake Grenades to the airport should be held accountable for that for now on. How STUPID CAN PEOPLE BE! Semper Fi, Bob |
Originally Posted by USMCSS
(Post 10430768)
Ok, this is getting out of hand as I should have known it would; this will be my last reply on this subject. FWAAA, you state that if the Grenade went off it wouldn't hurt anyone more then x feet away. What to you is x; an m67 Fragmentation Grenade has a casualty radius of about 15 meters; 90 feet is a large radius, and that’s not to say the metal won't fly further than that.
It would be safe to say, given the totality of the circumstances, that getting everyone away from the area would be more than sufficiently prudent. You have a low probability of it actually being a grenade. If it is a grenade you a low probability of an actual grenade detonating. If it actually detonates you have a low probability of casualties for people at least X meters away and behind some barrier (wall, etc.). A low probability times a low probability times a low probability is a very low probability. I'd say clearing the general area would be more than sufficient. |
Originally Posted by USMCSS
(Post 10430768)
Ok, this is getting out of hand as I should have known it would; this will be my last reply on this subject. FWAAA, you state that if the Grenade went off it wouldn't hurt anyone more then x feet away. What to you is x; an m67 Fragmentation Grenade has a casualty radius of about 15 meters; 90 feet is a large radius, and that’s not to say the metal won't fly further than that. So, as in my first post; you need to Think for one second.
When a dam Grenade goes off and kills someone that was behind the 90 foot mark the TSA decided to use so they would not inconvenience anyone, you would be in an up roar that they didn't do more to protect people. And god help it if it was someone you know. They did the right thing and that's all there is to it. The other stuff you are arguing is worth it; this is ridiculous! My god, people had to go through security again instead of possibly getting their dam head blown off. And people that bring fake Grenades to the airport should be held accountable for that for now on. How STUPID CAN PEOPLE BE! Semper Fi, Bob While I agree that the area should have been contained, 15 meters is really about 45 feet. So the area really isn't that big. Furthermore - and this is the kind of stupidity I've seen in some of the TSA terminal dumps - folks that are forced to leave the secure area must walk right past the screening stations.... the same place that the suspect object is. That's true at some heavily traveled hub airports, such as CVG, DCA, LAX, etc. I can promise you that the separation between the screening stations and the exit lane is NOT Level-5 (or even level 2) certified. The agency has problems from head to foot... Unfortunately, the deterrent effect of many of the policies handed down from "on high" have always been ineffective (more for show than anything), and have become even less effective as time has gone on (as people see their lack of value). What needs to happen is to have the agency take a real "risk management" approach, rather than doing "shows of force" that make people goose-step. It truly is about command-and-control of the public.... Yes, there are real risks that need to be addressed. The problem is that real risks are often overlooked in the zeal for "catching" someone with a 3.5 ounce bottle of liquid... or arguing that pumpkin pie is a gel. |
I said I wasn't going to reply but I had to clear my statement up; what I meant to say is from end to end the area would be 90 feet, which is pretty large. I wasn't at the airport and I don't know what the scene looked like, but I am not going to put them down for clearing to big of an area. Also, just because the casualty radius is 90 meters, "about 45 feet, about 90 feet end to end," doesn't mean the shrapnel won't fly further. It would also fly through walls.
I guess we could argue this all day; I just can't look at them in a bad light for that call. However the other things such as the little bottles and all the other crazy stuff, I am 100% behind all of you. Semper Fi, Bob |
I just would like to say one more thing; you guys all seem like good people. I don't have to put up with what you do everyday at the airport so I guess it is a lot easier for me to defend something the TSA did.
I would not like to be talked down too or pushed around. I just hope you can remember that not all the guys that work there are bad. Even though there are a lot of crazy things they do; I am glad someone is there checking. I hope things change for the better, maybe after the election it will. Semper Fi, Bob |
Originally Posted by USMCSS
(Post 10429733)
Please understand; I get it that TSA has a lot of procedures implemented that need to be changed. I get it that a lot of their SOP is ridiculous. Some people on here are complaining about things that are trivial, and some of the complaints are ignorant, that is the point I was trying to make. I was also trying to point out that not all of the TSO’s are bad.
And by no means do I claim to be an expert traveler. Studentff made a lot of great points and I agree with all of them; they are things that should be complained about; my post was to have people think about what they are complaining about before they do. I could give you a detailed, multi-paged analysis of people's negative, unforgiving attitudes towards the TSA -- their policies, their procedures, their attitudes and their employees -- and why I think they are justified. Instead, I'll simply point out that people on this board come into contact with agents working for dozens, or even hundreds, of air travel security agencies around the world in the course of their travels. Yet 99% of the complaints are about one agency -- the TSA. The examples provided by other agencies prove that not only is it possible to provide security without being petty, harassing or intimidating, it apparently isn't even that difficult, since just about every other agency in the world seems to have managed it without a huge amount of difficulty. So when you go off on a trip to 2, 3, 4, 5 countries, and your experience in one of those countries is markedly worse than all the others, why would you think anything but negatively about the TSA? |
Originally Posted by ralfp
I'd say clearing the general area would be more than sufficient.
Originally Posted by USMCSS
Maybe someone on this forum from TSA can confirm whether or not it is TSA policy to bark orders at the Flyer?
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:20 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.