Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Fisher1949, Apr 19, 2012.
It just showed up!
I would report anyone that I thought was guilty of something regardless of my occupation.
And I always thought determining guilt was the job of a court and jury.
Okay George Zimmerman, or is it Hitler. In my area snitches/vigilantes don't last very long...they get there just desserts PDQ.
How far do you go with that? If your neighbors have one dog more than your local statutes allow but the dogs aren't bothering anybody, would you report it? How about if you have a friend who you know smokes a joint every once in a while? What if one of your co-workers has a broken tail light or has tags on the car that are a couple months expired, and they've expressed no urgency in fixing the problem?
Where do you draw the line? Do you really follow every law to the letter yourself? Your statement is pretty sweeping there; you might want to rethink it and clarify.
Some people are just more righteous than all others, funny thing they all seem to work for TSA.
I guess it depends on the situation. So I shouldn't say anyone.
Nope, and I probably wouldn't know the local statutes.
As long as they don't smoke in front me, I don't care.
Probably when it's something important I'll report it, if not I don't care. Like someone beating his kids, I'll report. Someone littering, I won't.
No one does.
Yes, I was speaking in general. The point of it was that I'm not in the TSA to report people for being guilty of something, I would do it regardless. My point was not to get you to believe I would report everyone for any violation of any policy, statute, law, guideline, etc. You could probably tell this from the context.
But let's keep taking this to absurd levels. Would I report someone for jaywalking? probably not. Would I report someone for picking a flower? Probably not. Would I report someone for parking in a handicap space without a handicap placard? probably not. Would I report someone for pirating software or movies? probably not. Would I report someone for selling raw milk over state lines? probably not. I can keep going if you wish.
Or they're christian.
Reporting doesn't equal murdering. Too bad Zimmerman isn't in your area.
If no one reports it, would the court and jury have someone to judge?
Some screeners down in FLL are going to be offended that you decided they are christian. Should they surrender their yarmulks?
Your other name isn't TSORon, is it? How many screeners have we "heard" say the exact same thing?
It must be part of the indoctrination, occurring at some point right after their brain, soul, and humanity are surgically excised (assuming they had them to begin with.)
Well, realistically, passengers would have a higher rate of nabbing suspects if every time they entered an airport security screening area, they called the police and reported the TSA scum at the area of having committed a crime. It is a given that at any time, at any airport screening area, there is a TSA employee that has committed or will soon be committing a crime.
Ciarin -- Thanks for the answer to my questions. I do know you weren't talking about absurd little violations, but that was also my point in asking. What is "important" is so subjective. Some people would bust a farmer selling raw milk over state lines. Some people (even here on this board) might think that's a good thing. Someone who legitimately needed to park in the handicap space might think it important to bust someone illegally parked in their space. I have my own standard of things I would report, and it's probably similar to yours -- very clear instances of child abuse, for example. And last year some yahoo was walking around our neighborhood shooting a gun in the street at night, and at one point I saw the muzzle blast through our back fence. I called the cops on that, since I felt like it threatened my safety in my own home.
I think my point here is that we've heard from other screeners that they report non-WEI contraband at the checkpoint (say, a joint, or what look like fraudulent checks) not as a part of a job, but because it is what a good citizen does. But most good citizens don't rat out their fellow citizens for small violations, like a discreetly hidden joint, and it happens regularly at TSA checkpoints. And most good citizens don't go on witch hunts rooting through a lady's purse when she appears nervous, and then get all excited about some sequentially numbered checks and call the cops and her husband about their fantasy of what crime she might have committed. But it has happened at a TSA checkpoint.
We've also heard other accounts that lead us to believe that the TSA is running a thorough criminal dragnet at checkpoints. People's children have been screened without cause, against parental objections, to check if they've been kidnapped. In this situation, when pressed, I believe it was a manager who told the mother they were following a secret directive to look for kidnapped children. Ex-screener Bill Forster tells us that he got a lot of positive attention for finding drugs, none for finding weapons. He also tells us that it was policy to count people's cash, and the notorious Bierfeldt case showed how some screeners detained and interrogated people over amounts of cash they deemed suspicious. And someone more legally savvy might help me here, but didn't one of the TSA legal cases involve screeners who got cash rewards for finding drugs or something like that?
Anyway, I hope you can see where I'm going with this. The stance that reporting non-WEI is not a part of a screener's job, but it's what a good citizen does, does not hold water for us on this board.
P.S. I can dig up links to any of these stories if you want more information. Don't have the time at the moment to look for links, is all.
All those stories are in the Master Lists.
(And by the way, my list is constantly updated, though the updates don't appear immediately here at TUG because they take hours to load. So there are lots of stories of abuse that have taken place and been compiled since the last update was posted. Of course. There are always more instances of abuse. Would that it weren't so.)
Nevermind your too narrow/closed minded to get the point. Your response (along with others) speaks volumes.
As I've stated previously, once someone says they work for the TSA (whether the statement is true or not) one can simply disregard the rest of anything they might say as probable lies.
If they don't work for the TSA, but claim they do, they're a liar.
If they really do work for the TSA, they can't be trusted anyway.
Candy coating doesn't help.
Separate names with a comma.