TSA bomb-sniffing dog bites woman at Hartsfield-Jackson

He's dumb enough to believe the TSA is capable of training a bomb-sniffing dog when the TSA has proven incapable of training their human "employees" not to harass people who have cameras. If breathing weren't autonomic, he'd die.

 

This is just another great reason to continue not flying.

Since we were last on a plane (December 27, 2010), there have been zero improvements in the aviation security experience that would encourage us to resume flying. At work, I have standing orders to visit our facilities in Sweden & India, but the odds of that happening just went down another notch.

 

It seriously baffles me why anyone would travel by air these days.

The entire experience is miserable. The whole damn thing from beginning to end.

Someone close to me was supposed to fly out today. TSA security lines were long. TSA employees were rude, surly, and downright nasty. The flight was cancelled. Everyone was reaccommodated on later flights. The gate areas were chaos. And this is a sunny day with no weather anywhere near us.

So she finally gave up, rented a care and drove.

Flying in the US today is simply not worth the repeated, ongoing hassles, and is also apparently a true hazard to your health, livelihood, and well being.

 

Huh??

The traveler did nothing to provoke being alerted to, much less bitten. "Provoke" may be a term of dog-handling art, but I don't really care what's going on in dog-world--- keep your damn TSA biting dogs away from me!

Yes, 100%, par for the course gauntlet.

The dog was right back at work at the airport alongside APD, according to the AJC story. Officials are spinning to call the drug-and-bomb sniffing canine an "explosive-detection" dog.

 

To say the dog attacking the woman was "not unprovoked" seems to shift blame to the woman who was waiting for her party. So let us be clear, the dog handler is solely at fault for not controlling the animal, no one else, regardless of the womans action. Second point, there is no reason to have a dog in the luggage claim. Any threat to the airport/airlines will not come from there. I have no idea why a local cop would have a TSA dog but it seems improper to me. Sadly the dog will likely be held accountable while the human walks clean.

 

in fairness, as Rugape and the story both noted, the dog and its mis handler were from the Atlanta PD. On the other hand, since TSA wants its hands in my crotch for no good reason, screw fairness.

 

To be completely clear, the dog was ATL PD, but "trained" by the TSA.

​

But did the handler receive TSA "training" in how to handle the dog the TSA "trained?" Was it as much or more "training" than the average screener or SPOTnik gets, where less than 80 hours of "training" turns someone with no marketable skills into "The Mentalist?"

 

No, the dog is TSA, teamed with APD. Interdicting terrorists at baggage claim , after 10 weeks of TSA training:
http://www.tsa.gov/about-tsa/canine-training-and-evaluation-section-ctes

 

I remember it, too. IIRC, it was a comment on some message board or on an article. Hard to find, I think we discussed it in a thread about something else, like TSA dogs in general. If memory serves, the guy said the dog bit him and the young woman handler just kept walking like nothing happened, but a police officer saw the whole thing and made a big stink about it, called paramedics even though the bite wasn't serious and "detained" the dog and handler. Then the TSA dog handler's supervisor came over and was griping at the cop, saying he needed that dog and handler back on duty. And the cop had some choice words for him.

The guy telling the story seemed to find the whole thing absurdly amusing.

 

Found it: http://www.travelunderground.org/in...ot-limited-to-two-legged-tsa.4809/#post-41516

I couldn't remember the city--wondered if it was MARTA, thus part of the same crack canine team as ATL, but no, it was in Detroit.

 

The problem is defending yourself from an unprovoked attactkfrom a police dog is seen as assaulting a police officer. After the beatdown, you will be arraigned by a judge in the trauma center.

 

Now think about this for a minute, and we all glossed over it up to this point: A bomb-sniffing dog in baggage claim is either in the wrong place, or it's a drug-sniffing dog, not a bomb-sniffing dog.

Lack some level of probable cause or reasonable suspicion, I believe that such a search does not pass constitutional muster.

 

I considered a drug dog but discounted it, TSA dogs should only be trained for explosives. If they are training drug dogs we have bigger fish to fry. Seems our goverment has no respect for our constitution and operates outside of the law without penalty.

 

I made some observations in #24 & #28 upthread, and following RB on searching exiting passengers. Also:

Most stories in the media are repeating the description of an "explosive-detection" pooch (only), and no doubt the limitations are why. Yet they have to have a dog alert to search further for drugs.

 

Whether it's a drug-sniffing dog or a bomb-sniffing dog becomes wholly irrelevant when it bites someone. The dog itself is poorly trained, and the handler is incompetent - which should surprise absolutely no one when the TSA is known to have been involved in either or both.

 

Eh thats a 50/50 proposition, self defense would be a valid reason for knocking kujo one as I know of two cases locally that didn't end good for the dog or the entity that owned the dog for unprovoked attacks. Pigs issuing a beat down for self defense just going to add a few zeros to the jury award.

 

Agree, once the dog bites I think its working career should be over. Send the dog to a nice home and let it chase cats. The handler is a different story, can't put him down but no reason to ever let them handle another animal.

 

If they can't handle a dog, they can't handle an opponent with thumbs. They shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a badge.

 

Dog's propensity to go after those in blue shirts could be put to good use-- a 'train the trainer' program perhaps?

 

Read the entire series of statements explaining what I meant - all dog bites are provoked by something. As previously mentioned, it could have been something as simple as a scent, a noise, the spatial situation - we simply do not know *what* provoked the attack. I never implied or stated the traveler was at fault in any way shape or form, quite the opposite, I stated it sounded more and more like the handler did not employ proper techniques.

TSA only has dogs trained for detection of explosives. CBP may have others, and any number of other LEO agencies may have others, but the TSA dogs are trained only for explosives detection.

I was not shifting blame at all, I was simply stating that the bite was provoked by something, we just do not know what it was (see previous comments). I agree with you that the handler is 100% at fault for the situation. Any handler with a working dog is responsible for the actions of that dog - at all times. This passenger was not at fault based on what I have read, so please do not read my comments any other way than they were intended - simply to state that the bite was provoked by something, not to lay blame past the handler.

I agree that sadly the dog will be held accountable for the handlers failure to use proper techniques and exercise peroper awareness.