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. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    If it works, then it works only in the sense that it does catch everything by casting too broad a net. It alarms on people and things in nearly 100% of the cases that do not have explosives. Given the limitations of this test, and the overwhelmingly high percentage of false alarms in that the alarmed people are not in fact carrying explosives, what would you suggest as a better and more sensible resolution of the alarms than is done currently?
     
    barbell, Cartoon Peril and DeafBlonde like this.
  2. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    I can't think of anything that would be more helpful to terrorism than an explosives test which generated 100% false alarms. No one takes the test seriously so that even if you had handled explosives, they clear the people through just attributing it to hand lotion, machine error, operator error, or making no determination at all (and not caring).
     
  3. 4nsicdoc

    4nsicdoc Original Member

    The Beltran-Leyva cartel?
     
    Lisa Simeone, KrazyKat and Fisher1949 like this.
  4. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    LOL.
    BTW, Congress and the Executive branch are a given.
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  5. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    Accepting that this not part of of the SOP and these documented incidents are incidental then why does TSA insist that these were done properly? If this is not part of the SOP then there would be no SSI to protect and they could simply come come out and say this isn't allowed, properly instruct the screeners, and reprimand those who commit errors and apologize to the victims when there is a mistake. Why is TSA refusing to make it clear that this is unacceptable unless the gropings are being used as a punitive measure to force use of the scanners?

    There have been over 4,000 groping incidents reported to various organizations such as ACLU, EPIC, USTA, TRI and TSA itself. Perhaps some are exaggerated, maybe even false, but most are likely legitimate. In addition to these there have been hundred of independent accounts such as the Susie Castillo incident and the TX officials who were groped in MSY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKE98...layer_embedded)

    There hasn't been one groping complaint where TSA acknowledged the error or apologized to the victim. In the only case where they did make a public apology, the Thomas Sawyer ostomy bag rupture they managed to screw that up and nearly repeat the same abuse of him. They didn't even apologize after losing the lawsuit to woman whose breasts they exposed in Corpus Christi. A little humility and self restraint by the agency would have gone a long way to improve public opinion of the agency.

    Seems to me the main PR gaffe for TSA has been flaunting their lack of accountability and mindlessly attempting to defend clearly indefensible errors. Of course, having a freak like BB as a front man doesn't help either.
     
  6. barbell

    barbell Coach Coach

    What I find far more troubling than this, though it is an excellent question, is that the SOP apparently makes such contact possible.

    An SOP that makes direct genital contact available, but then apparently it's an "oopsie" is just downright bizarre.

    It also goes back to my earlier point that it puts all of us at risk in the clear and direct sights of predators of all kinds, all because TSA doesn't consider the ill effects of such an "oopsie." And that's how Tom Sawyer winds up soaked in his own urine. It's how men get their testicles manipulated, and how women have their labia poked.

    The available data indicate that TSA has a far greater proportion of pedophiles and sexual predators than any other organization by percentage, and our bodies are left open for their abuse.

    I just have one thing to say about that:

    :td::td::td::td::td:
     
  7. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    Unwanted sex organ contact that occurs well outside the protocol should result in immediate prosecution, just like it does when your doctor molests you.
     
  8. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    It should result in an immediate punch in the face, but they've turned in into such sheep we tolerate this.
     
  9. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    And Pistole is about risk management? The main risk that seems to motivate them is the spigot, their support. Not harm. Not liability. Certainly not safety, common sense, or logic.

    I'm as angry or more at the spineless legal profession that won't go after this cartel serving up our bodies as I am any lowly perp.
     
  10. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Legal profession has to be paid, needs clients willing to sue. Where are they?
    Here's the bitter goddamn truth: The terrorists have won. We are terrorized.
     
    Wimpie, Lisa Simeone and barbell like this.
  11. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    your solution does have a certain ring (or thud) to it.

    how about, "if the offended party decides on an 'in-kind' remedy short of permanent disfigurement or death, that shall be allowed, but the penalty thus applied shall remove the defendant from further criminal prosecution".
     
  12. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    Interesting that he chose to not respond to this post........but maybe he's put me on his virtual ignore list where I have him. :D

    And for good measure, this statement is even more definitive about where the hand travels:

     
  13. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    Flattery will get you nowhere, Hon.

    Actually, I have a life and am busy. So please don't confuse my busy life with ignoring questions. As for the question itself, I have nothing more to add other than to repeat what I've already posted. I know the SOP. Fact is that children are rarely patted down. When the new changes to into effect in the near future, it will be even rarer. The only exception will be if a parent or guardian specifically requests a pat down for the child or if the child, after all the opportunities to divest, still has something that can only be resolved with a pat down.
     
  14. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    No point in reiterating my numerous prior comments. Just one question: when is the agency going to bring these things to train depots, sporting events, etc.?
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  15. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    I work at an airport.
     
  16. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Unresponsive to the question.
     
    Lisa Simeone likes this.
  17. Cartoon Peril

    Cartoon Peril Original Member

    Outside of the airport, here are just two of many examples of what is going on:
    * On February 16, 2010, your agency was in the Tampa bus station, patting people down, working over the luggage with dogs, and "cooperating" with the Border Patrol to look for immigration violators. This video actually shows passengers being patted-down.
    * Senator Chuck Schumer now wants a no-ride list for trains, which Amtrak says would have to be implemented in coordination with TSA.
    So far, the only thing missing is apparently sufficient genius to pack one of the Chertoffomizers onto a flat-bed truck and roll around the country doing "random" checks on bus and train passengers.
     
  18. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    At the end of the day, I still work at an airport. I don't work at a train station or bus depot. I don't work for Border Patrol or any other federal agency.
     
    Cartoon Peril likes this.
  19. Bart

    Bart Original Member

    You're asking me about something I have nothing to do with. I am only one man; I'm not the agency.
     
  20. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Why would he know? Have they turned those snow globes in to crystal balls?
     
    barbell likes this.

Share This Page