Kids Keep Shoes on in DEN/BOS/ATL/IAH/MIA - UPDATED

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by FriendlySkies, Aug 24, 2011.

  1. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I remember seeing the Blues as a young kid, F11's then I think, and continuing with the F4, A4 and F18's over the years. Being in Naval Aviation provided good opportunities. If your an aviation buff take in the Reno Air Races some year.
    Rugape likes this.
  2. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    Again, arm yourself with some facts rather than the nonsense you're spewing here. Not worth discussing until then.

    Have a nice day.
  3. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop: to be told I can't prove my allegation, that those methods aren't in the SOP (that I can't see anyway), and --look--this week we aren't groping anymore. So this will be passed off as some collective hallucination, hysteria, from hysterical types.

    If everyone withdraws their complaints and threats of lawsuit will we get acknowledgment, an apology, and a wholly new policy that makes sense?

    Unfortunately, no. Yet backing into the future with denials isn't going to work for TSA either. There are too many of us that have been abused, too much that can be seen recorded, to palm this off--certainly-- as nonsense. I have a lot going on in my life, better things to do than tilt at windmills like DHS. I was injured. Barbell was. Many, many others were.

    I have a lot of sympathy for you, Bart (and Rugape), because I worked for an agency where people I knew and respected practically wanted to spit on me because I was part of a machine. Finally the agency didn't trust me anymore because they thought I had 'gone native'. Pretty ironic that I was hated by all. Just a dumb kitty trying to do an upright job within constraints. Oh well.

    The TSA is obviously backpedalling and trying to find a defensible way of operating. But like so many things, I don't think there is going to be progress until there is honesty about what has transpired.

    Here is an olive branch and my question to you: How do you think the TSA can change and go forward into a sensible regime? Having children be potential bomb plants one day but not the next shows how thin the tape is holding this together. It would be great if the agency could reinvent itself on the anniversary of 9/11. I don't see that happening. Trying to discredit complainants won't work either. What does TSA do? What axis of constructive change do you see?
    DeafBlonde and barbell like this.
  4. RB

    RB Founding Member

    TSA isn't trying to change, TSA is just trying to deflect the negative press they keep getting.

    TSA is still feeling up people of all ages, electronically strip searching people without cause, and in some cases actually making people remove their clothing.
  5. I'm still waiting to hear what facts there are that you think I don't have. I thought perhaps you took issue with my using the "junk touching" euphemism when there has been a change and kids don't have their genitals specifically touched. I was using "junk touched" to describe the entire situation, when even if my kids wouldn't have their genitals touched, hands would come awfully close, including going inside their pants, and would indeed touch their bottoms and chests. Best case scenario I'm forced, under severe penalty, to watch as they are touched intimately by a stranger, groomed for child predators, and learn to submit their bodies meekly to uniformed authorities, even when it goes against what I've taught them about strangers and touching. But even if this change is real (and I have no way to know that it is for a fact, or if the memo has made it to whatever checkpoint I'm passing through), I am still allowing a stranger who I have no way to vet have full access to my childrens' bodies, which puts them in a position to cop a quick feel of whatever they want, whether it violates policy or not, and from everything I read there seems to be little oversight and little recourse besides filling out a comment card. And by standing there watching, in my kids' minds, I am authorizing whatever happens. It's a terrible lesson to teach them.

    I take it you aren't coming back to this thread, but I was hoping you wanted to engage in a civil discussion about this. Honestly and truly, I'm arming myself with as many facts as I can (anecdotes, court cases, TSA policies, legal rights) and if you've got more, I'd like to hear them. I had a great exchange with Rugape the other day and I think we both felt like we found common ground and respected each other's positions, even if we disagreed. If you can be kind, honest, and non-patronizing, I can too.
    Cartoon Peril likes this.
  6. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    I honestly don't see why Bart comes here. I'm not being snarky or trying to drive anyone away. I'm just saying, why bother? A few people out in the Blogosphere, what, does he think we have the plans to the Imperial Death Star?
  7. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    I don't know. Why do we come here? He and the rug ape add something, imo.
    KrazyKat and barbell like this.
  8. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Bart is quit welcome here. It would be rather monotonous if all we had to listen to was our own choir.
    N965VJ, KrazyKat and barbell like this.
  9. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    TSOs do not touch children's genitals. As to whether or not children are "groomed" for child predators, that's all up to your parenting skills. If you have great parenting skills, then this won't be such a traumatic experience. If your parenting skills suck, then your kids are going to have a lot more problems than some TSO performing a pat down on them.

    The new procedures are a reasonable change. If you want to stick to your paranoia, be my guest. However, if you are as reasonable as you claim, I think you'll see that you pretty much have to deliberately set your child up to be patted down. That's on you. You're going to have a whole bunch of opportunities to avoid that scenario.
  10. DeafBlonde

    DeafBlonde Original Member

    As seen on a T-shirt:
    I am not
    A bitch
    I am
    THE Bitch
    ...and that's
    MS. Bitch
    to you!!!
    KrazyKat likes this.
  11. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    (I hesitate to chime in b/c I still hope you'll answer my other comment, but): Children do not travel lightly; "good parents" consider their children's needs for amusement and comfort on a long plane ride. There are going to be little things that are in pockets sometimes--it happens-- should not removal and wanding be sufficient?

    Dismissing as paranoia doesn't address the legitimate concern Phoebepontiac raises:
    To teach your child that their body is their own, and that no one should touch them (ever), surely the braintrust at the TSA sees the problem with including the caveat "except a nice person in a uniform."?
  12. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Except when they do.

    An example of TSA-approved parenting skills: "Just make it a game." This was the well-known Mandy Simon incident from a few years back (white shirt days). The TSO kept grabbing after the child after child started screaming "Don't touch me."
  13. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    No, they don't, which is exactly the point I was making upthread.

    Bart, bless his heart, because he's a "good guy" can't comprehend how these ham handed gropings adversely affect people. You and I both, and many others, have the unfortunate knowledge of what happens even when everything goes perfectly right. Of course, everything is just as likely to go horribly wrong.

    It's difficult to take seriously the protestations that children's genitals will not be groped, because, well, they probably will be.

    Tom Sawyer had his own urine dumped on him. And John Pistole apologized to him. And there were meetings. And the policy was changed. And retraining occurred. And TSA employees were taught to be more sensitive. And the TSA works with all kinds of groups representing people with disabilities. Even "victims" (their word) of sex crimes and abuse. Honest! TSA claims they aren't the bad guys. And then Tom Sawyer gets roughed up again.

    It's the same story we hear every.single.time TSA gets involved.

    History tells us that TSA is so blinded by its mission, by its own sense of rightness, by its own tunnel vision, that it cannot even consider the possibility you suggest.

    Based on his posts I infer that Bart is a highly intelligent individual, and is probably one of the better trainers within TSA. He's just fallen in with the wrong crowd. We know, based on his previous postings, that front line employees don't perform their jobs correctly, and he steps in to ensure they do, whether or not the "correct" way to perform the job is the "right" way to do the job, which is a different discussion for a different thread. We therefore know that children's genitals will be groped. It's an unfortunate reality of the confluence of facts here.

    And then add to this fact that actual pedophiles somehow manage to find their way into the ranks of the TSA, and you have a recipe for disaster. Children's genitals are going to continue getting groped, whether or not they should be, per policy, is immaterial. Which is why we want TSA hands off of our bodies.
  14. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Not to mention that once a child is 13, TSA considers him or her fair game.
  15. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    Well, that's a whole other problem entirely.
  16. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    Thanks for the kind words.

    TSA does not hire pedophiles. However, there are probably pedophiles within TSA's ranks. My point is that pedophilia is something that only manifests itself once a person is caught at it. I believe that's true in any line of work or profession. Unfortunately.

    For what it's worth: as I've said before, my airport has a high number of former or retired military veterans. A lot of them now are veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, but there are still enough of old farts like me from previous eras to even out the military experience level.

    I know I would not be able to prevent what a military veteran would do to a fellow TSO who was found out to be a pedophile. Not so sure I would even try to get in the way. That's the Old School soldier in me.
    Rugape likes this.
  17. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    Bart, we are saying the same thing.

    Does TSA go to NAMBLA meetings and recruit employees? No. To think so would be absurd.

    But there are pedophiles in the ranks, as you correctly point out are in any ranks. I know of at least 2 in my own profession.

    The problem is that the current procedures allow a pedophile, or any sexual deviant for that matter, access to a person's body. THAT is the problem.
  18. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    I am truly surprised that you would put this on TSA, assuming that you are a frequent flyer. Most, if not all, airlines have established 12 years old as the age when children can fly unaccompanied. If parents/guardians want a 12 year old or older child to be accompanied, they have to pay a fee.

    TSA's policy is simply fitting in with what airlines have established BEFORE TSA was created.
  19. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    You're mixing apples and oranges there. I could give my neighbor's 13 year old (or any age for that matter) a ride somewhere (parent consenting, of course) but you'd be looking me up in the sex offender registry if I stopped to make out with her. Being able to ride (fly) is not a legitimate consent to being groped.
  20. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Saying that TSA doesn't recruit pedophiles is like saying TSA has a zero-tolerance policy for theft. I am aware of no organizations that have any contrary policies, so this isn't really advancing the agency's reputation very much.

    Let me put it another way: The Constitution protects each person from unreasonable searches and seizures of his or her body. It is not necessary to show that the particular government agent performing the task was motivated by greed, lust or what have you to trigger the constitutional protection. It would in fact be no protection at all, for every government intrusion is always cloaked in the guise of righteousness.
    barbell likes this.

Share This Page