TSA Enhanced Pat Downs : The Screeners Point Of ViewwoolyswNovember 22 2010, 23:28:11 UTC
Interesting to hear the PoV from the other side. TSA Enhanced Pat Downs : The Screeners Point Of View. They aren't happy either, and I agree that yelling at the lowest person on the totem pole is not effective nor fair to them.
And to the people who are complaining I have two words - "Underwear Bomber".
Re: TSA Enhanced Pat Downs : The Screeners Point Of ViewsnowcallaNovember 23 2010, 04:14:39 UTC
"Underwear Bomber"
Oh please. For those saying we should just allow the government to do whatever they want for an illusion of safety, I have two words - 4th Amendment. Or perhaps these two words - Security Theatre.
The TSA has not caught nor prevented a single terrorist. Not a single one. Expert after expert agrees that what the TSa does isn't security. It's a show. A sham.
We have done a few good things. The biggest one was securing the cockpit doors.
If we were serious about real security we would screening ALL baggage as that's the most likely place for a bomb. Or we would profile (no, not making race a determining factor) We would hire and train security experts - not HS diploma and GED persons with no experience. There are many things we could do, but don't. Instead we would rather make policy based on what happened a year ago. We would rather perform invasive searches that are not allowed at any other border crossing situation without probable cause
( ... )
Re: TSA Enhanced Pat Downs : The Screeners Point Of ViewwoolyswNovember 23 2010, 05:16:45 UTC
Whereas I agree that TSA is mostly Security Theatre and we might possibly do better (like Israel does, but that would mostly involve profiling - and we can't have that, now can we?, nor is it feasible to scale the Israeli methods up to the number of passengers the US screens per day), the 4th Amendment is oft quoted and is not relevant.
Voluntarily agreeing to fly means agreeing with government restrictions; quite a bit of case law (see, e.g., here and here, the latter stating “An airport screening search is reasonable if: (1) it is no more extensive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives; (2) it is confined in good faith to that purpose; and (3) passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.” - the Underwear Bomber reinforcing point #1). [edit - sorry, no idea why it's formatting extra lines for the italics text
( ... )
Re: TSA Enhanced Pat Downs : The Screeners Point Of ViewsnowcallaNovember 23 2010, 16:53:39 UTC
No - all baggage is not screened. TSA had to admit that recently. Less than 20% of baggage is screened for bombs, etc. It is xrayed, but that does very little.
But the 4 amendment does apply. It can be relaxed in certain situations and the government is claiming that this is 'border search' - which means you have far less protection from the 4th amendment. Except - that was never meant to apply to internal US state borders - only borders to other countries.
It's been said if someone has to travel to a location that's equivalent to a 10-hour drive, they should actually just go ahead and drive. By the time you're done going through all the BS with the airport,, that's about the time you've burned. That includes:
- getting there - going through TSA - waiting around two hours - flight is delayed, so more waiting around - arriving at destination - retrieving luggage - waiting for shuttle bus - getting rental car - locating hotel
Not to mention, by driving, you won't lose your luggage, you aren't held hostage anywhere, and food along the Interstate is at least more interesting ;)
As far as TSA people crying about how tough their jobs are, that's what they get paid the big bucks for. And yes, I'm being somewhat facetious there, but not really. For the amount of training and education involved, it's a great job with lots of benefits people in the public sector just don't see. In other words,
Dunno about a ten hour drive...but, since the construction of the channel tunnel, the airlines have lost a sizeable chunk of their revenue for flights between London and places like Paris and Brussels (about an hour's flight). The train takes a bit under 3 hours but leaves from the middle of London and goes to the middle of Paris so, when you consider the getting to and from airports plus all the check-in/security malarkey, the train is miles faster and far more comfortable.
I've never been to Europe, so I have no personal experience, and at the rate things are going, I probably never will. But, I do have A LOT of experience driving all over the US, and the 10-hour drive sounds about right - for us. I have 43 states, all of Canada and half of Mexico under my belt, though now I doubt I'll go to Canada or Mexico because of the passport requirement. (I just can't justify dropping all that extra money and paperwork to see a desert, snow or mountains.)
I know some people don't like driving (I love it!), so there are trains and buses if one doesn't like flying. Even though they're both slow and not nearly as reliable as driving yourself, at least you're not fondled, held hostage or treated like children.
I couldn't live without a passport...I like the feeling of being able to go places. At last count, I've been to about 53 countries but don't have much time left for the rest! (I have to say "about" 53 because some countries have split and/or merged since my visits!)
...only 16 states so far though.
I enjoy a road trip when I have time though. We have vague plans to rent an RV and travel round Australia (which is about the same size as the contiguous 48) at some point in the next few years.
Comments 18
And to the people who are complaining I have two words - "Underwear Bomber".
Reply
Oh please. For those saying we should just allow the government to do whatever they want for an illusion of safety, I have two words - 4th Amendment. Or perhaps these two words - Security Theatre.
The TSA has not caught nor prevented a single terrorist. Not a single one. Expert after expert agrees that what the TSa does isn't security. It's a show. A sham.
We have done a few good things. The biggest one was securing the cockpit doors.
If we were serious about real security we would screening ALL baggage as that's the most likely place for a bomb. Or we would profile (no, not making race a determining factor) We would hire and train security experts - not HS diploma and GED persons with no experience. There are many things we could do, but don't. Instead we would rather make policy based on what happened a year ago. We would rather perform invasive searches that are not allowed at any other border crossing situation without probable cause ( ... )
Reply
Voluntarily agreeing to fly means agreeing with government restrictions; quite a bit of case law (see, e.g., here and here, the latter stating “An airport screening search is reasonable if: (1) it is no more extensive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives; (2) it is confined in good faith to that purpose; and (3) passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.” - the Underwear Bomber reinforcing point #1). [edit - sorry, no idea why it's formatting extra lines for the italics text ( ... )
Reply
But the 4 amendment does apply. It can be relaxed in certain situations and the government is claiming that this is 'border search' - which means you have far less protection from the 4th amendment. Except - that was never meant to apply to internal US state borders - only borders to other countries.
Reply
- getting there
- going through TSA
- waiting around two hours
- flight is delayed, so more waiting around
- arriving at destination
- retrieving luggage
- waiting for shuttle bus
- getting rental car
- locating hotel
Not to mention, by driving, you won't lose your luggage, you aren't held hostage anywhere, and food along the Interstate is at least more interesting ;)
As far as TSA people crying about how tough their jobs are, that's what they get paid the big bucks for. And yes, I'm being somewhat facetious there, but not really. For the amount of training and education involved, it's a great job with lots of benefits people in the public sector just don't see. In other words,
SUCK IT UP, TSA!
Reply
Reply
I know some people don't like driving (I love it!), so there are trains and buses if one doesn't like flying. Even though they're both slow and not nearly as reliable as driving yourself, at least you're not fondled, held hostage or treated like children.
Reply
...only 16 states so far though.
I enjoy a road trip when I have time though. We have vague plans to rent an RV and travel round Australia (which is about the same size as the contiguous 48) at some point in the next few years.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment