|
Folks - slight interjection from the cheap seats.
Bart is a long-time poster on FT, and used to spend quite a bit of time here in TS/S answering questions about TSA and their policies/procedures. He left to play in other parts of FT for quite a while. IMO, he did this because of the level of vehemence not so transparently directed at individual TSOs participating in this forum rather than the TSA as a whole. Personally, I can understand the prickly responses on this thread, as he has been ungraciously torn a new backside by several people on here from the outset of his involvement in the thread. Look at some of his older posts; the comparison to TSO Ron is not valid, IMO. (FWIW - I would not consider a failure to respond to another poster's comments within 3 hours "slinking off") This is not a defense of current posting actions, as I do see some comments where it appears as if Bart was responding to individual posts without reading the linked material from the OP. However, aren't we supposed to debate the content of a post, rather than the motivations or attitudes of the person posting? |
Originally Posted by DevilDog438
(Post 11649559)
Bart is a long-time poster on FT, and used to spend quite a bit of time here in TS/S answering questions about TSA and their policies/procedures. He left to play in other parts of FT for quite a while. IMO, he did this because of the level of vehemence not so transparently directed at individual TSOs participating in this forum rather than the TSA as a whole.
I believe his comments in this thread have been based on the current use for the mmw scanner, rather than the proposed mandatory use cited in the OP's linked article, and was just trying to steer the discussion back to that. It's mid-afternoon here is Oz but the middle of the night in the US, and I don't expect instant answers to my posts, especially at this time of day/night! :) |
I apologize if I came off a bit strong. I was just trying to point out that's what the media, news, people, and even TSA's own website says. Here's what the TSA website in the link I gave you said:
Millimeter wave technology will remain voluntary for passengers; those who do not wish to receive millimeter wave screening will undergo metal detector screening and a pat-down. I hope that clears things up?
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11648719)
You realize you're trying to argue with a Security Training Instructor, right? Oh well, believe as you wish. Nothing I say will change your opinion. Just don't try to pass it off as fact. Comes across as stupid.
|
*****
|
*****
|
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11648548)
Even at airports where they're used, everything I've read says that passengers will have a choice to pass through one of these body scanners or a regular WTMD.
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11648548)
I think a lot of you are overreacting without availing yourselves to the actual facts.
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11648719)
Nothing I say will change your opinion. Just don't try to pass it off as fact. Comes across as stupid.
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11650217)
My point remains: you have a choice between the MMW and WTMD. And if you divest wisely, chances of you passing through the WTMD without alarming it are greatly in your favor.
|
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11647274)
Passengers initially complained about all the physical contact required during the hand-wanding procedure. TSA revised its procedures by modifying how certain pat-downs were conducted; allowing more attempts at the walk-thru metal detector to give passengers more opportunities to successfully divest anything metallic that may trigger an alarm; and now has come up with a technology that virtually eliminates any need to physically pat down a passenger. Still, there are those who are determined to whine about one thing or another no matter what TSA does.
By the way, this technology was prompted by customer complaints. Yes. You are discontented no matter what TSA does to accommodate you. Talking about you specifically, not you in general. Wear it, son. And you wonder why we're "discontented", Bart?:mad: TSA has *NEVER* tried to be "accomodating", and you KNOW it. |
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11648719)
You realize you're trying to argue with a Security Training Instructor, right? Oh well, believe as you wish. Nothing I say will change your opinion. Just don't try to pass it off as fact. Comes across as stupid.
How do reports verifying what WE have been saying, as opposed to what you're claiming is policy (which TSA frequently won't follow, regardless, as has been frequently documented) come off, Bart? Throw your title around all you like. Reports from the field suggest that if ANYONE'S being "stupid" here, it's not those who are complaining about the "grope or strip-show" routine. Experience rules, Bart. If your theory doesn't fit what's actually happening out in the field, your theory LOSES. |
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11650230)
I very seriously doubt TSA would replace WTMDs across the country with these whole body imagers. First of all, the expense alone in terms of purchasing the machines, hiring contractors to install them AND maintain them would be unacceptable to Congress and the public. That turd just won't flush.
The other thing is that Kane is making a public statement, and of course he's going to be enthusiastic about this new whiz-bang technology. <snip>...Given the controversy, the wise thing for TSA to do is to offer choices: pass through the whole body imager OR the traditional WTMD. I can't see TSA eliminating the WTMD as an option.<snip>...If Gale Rossides or Janet Napolitano (when she's not making other stupid statements) were to say the same thing, then perhaps it would catch my attention. And I'll keep my fingers crossed behind my back. But the MMW operator already knew that. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
(Post 11649650)
+1. I'm not attacking Bart (and I've edited my previous post to make that clear). He was a good contributor in the past and gave useful insight into what happens with TSA.
|
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11650230)
I very seriously doubt TSA would replace WTMDs across the country with these whole body imagers. First of all, the expense alone in terms of purchasing the machines, hiring contractors to install them AND maintain them would be unacceptable to Congress and the public. That turd just won't flush.
The other thing is that Kane is making a public statement, and of course he's going to be enthusiastic about this new whiz-bang technology. The reality is, as reflected in several comments in this thread, that people still feel uncomfortable with the idea of their bodies being virtually exposed even if the image is only broadcast to a room with one operator of the same gender. Some people either don't mind or just want to do whatever it takes to get through the process without hassle. Others oppose the whole idea just on general principle. Given the controversy, the wise thing for TSA to do is to offer choices: pass through the whole body imager OR the traditional WTMD. I can't see TSA eliminating the WTMD as an option. Finally, as I posted earlier, I can't see the justification for having one of these machines at a category 2 or 3 airport which only has a couple of flights daily and is basically shut down the rest of the day. There's no bang for the buck; it's too inefficient. If Gale Rossides or Janet Napolitano (when she's not making other stupid statements) were to say the same thing, then perhaps it would catch my attention. We also have an acting chief technology officer describing a technologist's perfect world unconstrained by the real world of cost, schedule, requirements, bang-for-the-buck, etc. I'm surprised Kane, also "acting," would make a statement like this, assuming he was accurately quoted. Our friendly bloggers should have done the proper staff work before jumping on the bandwagon. Concerning Napolitano, I had no idea until yesterday that she was a communicable disease expert. I also had no idea she was wearing a second hat as the Secretary of HHS... |
Originally Posted by Bart
(Post 11650217)
I can understand why the TSA website posted this information. If you alarm the WTMD, you will receive additional screening which will result in a pat-down. This is especially true of individuals with metallic implants such as hip or knee replacements. However, for virtually everyone else, if they remove enough metal, and given the number of opportunities to divest at the WTMD, their chances of successfully passing through the WTMD without alarming it are greatly increased. I can see why TSA didn't rule out pat-downs with a blanket statement.
My point remains: you have a choice between the MMW and WTMD. And if you divest wisely, chances of you passing through the WTMD without alarming it are greatly in your favor. I understand where you are coming from, but the TSA's site is pretty clear; You do the strip-search or you get the WTMD and pat-down. So (and this is a serious question) are you saying that the website is simply incomplete (i.e., they didn't want to get started with "oh, and if you get through the WTMD without setting it off we'll send you on your merry way.") or flat-out incorrect? Thanks, Mike |
Wow! I, for one, am DELIGHTED to have Bart back!
Welcome back, Bart! Given the TWO or so "new" choices of being searched at my local airport, I hereby ABANDON my four years of refusing to line up for the mindless humiliation of public strip-searches by TSA Whim and am on my way to my local Airport as I write this with trembling fingertips! Oh, JOY! SANITY HAS RETURNED TO AMERICA! ...however... My smart, smart momma would have beat the holy livin' HELL outta me if I'd been that dumb, so... on second thought... |
*****
|
Bart, when I went through electronics school they told us that tubes were here to stay, transistorized equipment was rare and that any equipment with IC (integrated circuits) would be a once in a lifetime event. That was in 1971. By 1975 tubes pretty much were on their way out, transistors were quite common, and equipment with ICs were commonplace. The instructors I had were right, but they were wrong at the same time.
Often what takes place in the field only bears a passing resemblance to what was taught. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:33 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.