Jesse Ventura, just a tad crazy?
- Thread starter billc
- Start date
I've yet to see a TSA employee with untied shoes. Of course, I've also never seen them tying their own shoes-for all I know, their supervisor dresses them......:lfao:
In any case, you've missed an essential point-they're not law enforcement, and they're poorly trained-as well as set up for failure. I'm more than willing to bet that I could fly five or ten times more-however many times I like-with the same stuff and not raise so much as an eyebrow. In Albuquerque, I removed my shoe, belt, watch, and all other metal, was scanned and patted down, as was everyone else. The scanner was smart enough to point out the extra pockets on the cargo pants I was wearing, and I was asked about them, they were searched and found to be empty. My luggage was X-rayed, and the "tech" at the X-ray didn't bat an eye. Why would he? A pen, and a spay container of the permissable size among other spray containers in my toiletries. As for my behavior, I was the same as most of the other sheople flying that early morning-somewhat bleary eyed, and going through the required motions while trying to maintain whatever dignity I have. The very scenario preempts any kind of profiling on the basis of behavior by eliciting behavior from its participants. In other words, a terrorist doesn't have to worry about looking nervous-he just has to mooooove along with the herd.
Of course, having been subject to these kinds of searches for most of my career, and having worked directly with the TSA and DHS for most of their existence, I can say (and have pointed out repeatedly) that the guards that scan luggage are not adequately trained. On the other hand, if they were to receive such training and act on it, people might miss their flights, and we can't have that.
lastly, the ridiculous restrictions on volumes of liquids in carry-ons do nothing to make anyone safe from the very hazard they are supposedly meant to prevent.
Plus they outright lie to us. I took a brief foray in to the bomb detection...er...Electronic Threat Detection field after Enron and MCI/Worldcom managed to destroy the tech/telecom sector. I've even been to the US Army's Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey where our system gets tested with live explosives....the gob'mint didn't let us play with real ones unless the militay was close at hand 
(They did, however, let us play with dummy explosives that are close enough to the real thing to simulate a threat)
To have them come right out and say that the machines don't save data when a standard datasheet you can grab from the internet or by e-mailing the manufacturer clearly states it is a Windows XP system. Some even list their hard drive capacities. And yup, the ethernet jack is so it can be networked like an ordinary Windows system, which also means it can be hacked like an ordinary windows system if precautions aren't followed.
Then there is consistency. The European Union is starting to resist, believing the backscatter machines are too invasive. Do we hassle people within our borders when all a committed Al-Qaeda operative has to do is make sure the flight is boarded from Paris Charles De Gaulle and not Boston Logan?
Why is this happening? Why do we have to put up with continuing crap....such as uniformed TSA Agents leaving notes that say "Get Your Freak On Girl" when they see an...intimate toy in a lady passenger's luggage?
As a decidedly curvy girl, I learned from a very young age to respect my own body, to enforce boundaries, and to shun the indignant cries from those whining because my own personal standards were preventing them from gittin' what dey wanna git. Why must I risk dropping those standards simply to board an airplane? Why must I be faced between dropping those standards and continuing with my career? Very few jobs in my field are devoid of travel.
What do we do, write our congress critters? I have. The complaints fall on deaf ears. No one flies commercial...if you look online you can find comments from a US Rep from Missouri who has a knee replacement. She chose to sell her private jet and after the first time flying commercial, she was shocked -- I say, shocked -- at all the hassles that the ordinary flying public have to go through.
There are decent TSA agents out there. The ones at my home airport have made efforts to actually get to know their passengers...an important part of security. The Missouri rep also mentioned the agents she came across were very professional. I can't say all that I have encountered are, but many have been. The ones I encountered when having to do the less-invasive "Macarena" style search were exceedingly professional.
Even the one that was a man. After a series of weather delays, no one could guarantee that a female screener would arrive in time for me to get to my gate.
After I joked to the horror of other MT members that backscatter images might be captured and sold/exploited online after someone notable crossed through them - why did this happen in real life?
Why did the Dallas State House propose banning intimate searches?
Why was the first backscatter deployment -- which occurred when I was still in the detection field -- occur in ORLANDO? An airport that has more CHILDREN than any other?
I will agree that not all TSA agents are motards, but I can't be the only one that thinks this emperor may not be wearing any clothes.
(They did, however, let us play with dummy explosives that are close enough to the real thing to simulate a threat)To have them come right out and say that the machines don't save data when a standard datasheet you can grab from the internet or by e-mailing the manufacturer clearly states it is a Windows XP system. Some even list their hard drive capacities. And yup, the ethernet jack is so it can be networked like an ordinary Windows system, which also means it can be hacked like an ordinary windows system if precautions aren't followed.
Then there is consistency. The European Union is starting to resist, believing the backscatter machines are too invasive. Do we hassle people within our borders when all a committed Al-Qaeda operative has to do is make sure the flight is boarded from Paris Charles De Gaulle and not Boston Logan?
Why is this happening? Why do we have to put up with continuing crap....such as uniformed TSA Agents leaving notes that say "Get Your Freak On Girl" when they see an...intimate toy in a lady passenger's luggage?
As a decidedly curvy girl, I learned from a very young age to respect my own body, to enforce boundaries, and to shun the indignant cries from those whining because my own personal standards were preventing them from gittin' what dey wanna git. Why must I risk dropping those standards simply to board an airplane? Why must I be faced between dropping those standards and continuing with my career? Very few jobs in my field are devoid of travel.
What do we do, write our congress critters? I have. The complaints fall on deaf ears. No one flies commercial...if you look online you can find comments from a US Rep from Missouri who has a knee replacement. She chose to sell her private jet and after the first time flying commercial, she was shocked -- I say, shocked -- at all the hassles that the ordinary flying public have to go through.
There are decent TSA agents out there. The ones at my home airport have made efforts to actually get to know their passengers...an important part of security. The Missouri rep also mentioned the agents she came across were very professional. I can't say all that I have encountered are, but many have been. The ones I encountered when having to do the less-invasive "Macarena" style search were exceedingly professional.
Even the one that was a man. After a series of weather delays, no one could guarantee that a female screener would arrive in time for me to get to my gate.
After I joked to the horror of other MT members that backscatter images might be captured and sold/exploited online after someone notable crossed through them - why did this happen in real life?
Why did the Dallas State House propose banning intimate searches?
Why was the first backscatter deployment -- which occurred when I was still in the detection field -- occur in ORLANDO? An airport that has more CHILDREN than any other?
I will agree that not all TSA agents are motards, but I can't be the only one that thinks this emperor may not be wearing any clothes.
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
Ive never argued they are properly trained. I think they def need more training but I can also say that about many police officers I know too. My argument is you cant blame the agent for the policy he didnt write it. You cant blame the agent thats just trying to do his job and feed his kids because the TSA didnt give him better training. You throw up a few hundred incidents of bad agents yet look at the size of the agency and look how many contacts they have per day. How many TSA agents are in the US? I dont know I couldnt find the answer but I would guess there are more then any Law Enforcment agency in the Country. When you hire that many people in such a short amount of time bad apples are going to slip thru the cracks. Same would happen if a police department had to hire 1000's of people at one time. Is the system perfect no far from it. Can it be made better? Yes with out a doubt. Should Agents be better trained? Yes. Should then entire system be scrapped because a few people dont like it? Nope not until a better and safer system is made up that will work in this country with the size and diverse population that we have here. Should we call all TSA agents every nasty name in the book for doing a job? Well some on here think its ok however Im not one of them.
Hmmm. I don't think I said "TSA agents are booger eatin' morons." In fact, what I said was:
el Brujo de la Cueva said:
And I think I'll stand by that.
granfire
Sr. Grandmaster
I think Bob said that the TSA gave jobs to the booger and paste eating kids in school....
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
Like I said find something better and talk to your congressman. There are sympathetic memebrs of congress that also dislike the TSA give them something better to fight for.
I stand by my statement. I also stand by my ranking them as lower than pedophiles, and just as wanted here. (neither are welcome).
http://www.tsacrimes.com/
BTW, This year a total of ten TSA screeners (so far) have been arrested for child sex crimes. There have been 59 TSA screeners arrested so far this year, a rate of one very six days. Of these, ten are charged with sex crimes involving children and four with helping to smuggle drugs through security.
Can anyone tell me, how many -Real Cops- have been arrested for the same crimes?
Just to put this in a fair perspective.
contributed "master lists" of TSA abuses, crimes, etc.:
http://www.tsacrimes.com/
BTW, This year a total of ten TSA screeners (so far) have been arrested for child sex crimes. There have been 59 TSA screeners arrested so far this year, a rate of one very six days. Of these, ten are charged with sex crimes involving children and four with helping to smuggle drugs through security.
Can anyone tell me, how many -Real Cops- have been arrested for the same crimes?
Just to put this in a fair perspective.
contributed "master lists" of TSA abuses, crimes, etc.:
My congressman is rather useless. I've written, emailed, and phoned. He likes big government nanny-state stuff though.
Well, for many things, we did find something better. We went in with some friends on a Piper Cherokee Six....writing's on the wall on this one too, I'm afraid.....
I'll give mine credit, all 3 of mine wrote back. The best e-mail was from my senior senator who has co-sponsored a bill criminalizing the release of backscatter imagery. Pity its dying in committee.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s4037/show
Here's something better
http://www.flymanchester.com/
Facebook said:]Patty McIntoshManchester-Boston Regional Airport
Is MHT using the new backscatter x-ray machines now (or the highly invasive new pat search technique for those who wish to opt out of being irradiated)? And if so is it required of all travelers, just random selected ones, or only those traveling outside the US?[/h]Like · 18 November 2010 at 14:15 ·
Manchester-Boston Regional Airport Hello Patty, The advanced image technology equipment that you reference is owned and operated by TSA and is not in place at MHT. TSA conducts pat downs randomly and when walk through screening devices alarm. We recommend visiting the TSA's website for the most up to date security information before traveling. Thanks for the question.18 November 2010 at 15:49
The pat downs are the "macarena" style search and not the more invasive search.
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
Way more then 59 officers have been arrested this year. I can think of just with in 30 miles of me 2 of the largest deparmtnes in the state one locked up 13 at one time for taking bribes and towing vehicles that didnt need to be towed and using this one company they would pay the officers 50 to 100 bucks per car they towed. and a 2nd department that locked up like 9 or 10 for double dipping submiting OT slips while they were actually working. I personally worked with an an officer that was locked up during rollcall for sleeping with a 13 yr old. I was in VA last month for training and all over the news was a deputy arrested for looking at child porn on his department computer. Baltimore city arrested a cop a few months ago who got drunk and at a bar and shot and killed a Marine War vet in an ally. A small local department about 45 min from me just arrested an officer for rape. He arrested the husband for domestic assault took him to jail got off his shift went to the womans house and raped her. These are just local examples near me I can recall off the top of my head. Nationally there are storys of cops doing every crime under the sun from theft to serial killers.
So Im glad you have this respect for law enforcement but there are bad cops too as you already pointed out:
But let me ask you this would you be ok with current security progams if all TSA agents were sent to FLETC (Federal Law Enfrcement Training Center) completed the program all other federal law enforcement agencies do and then were sent back to the airports? Would that change your opinon of the process at all?
It depends. Would they then be bound by the US Constitution like real cops, or would they continue to have more powers and less liability than real cops?
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
The security as it is now is constitutional. If it wasnt there would be 1000's of court cases heading to supreme court to fight it like for example the health care bill.
The constitutionality is debatable as it's not, to my knowledge, been declared such by someone with the power.
Police do unconstitutional things every day, as the growing number of court cases against them for harassing photographers shows.
Despite losing those cases, those same departments continue to repeat those acts.
The TSA has more power than a cop, does not need to meet probable cause to search, to confiscate, to detain.
They just have to wanna.
Ventura's case was 1. There are others, and they are quickly dismissed. Not because 'its legal' but for other reasons. 'wrong court', 'wrong defendant', 'wrong time of day'.
It's a shame that Texas bent their neck to the DHS's threats. A whole state putting the TSA at legal risk for their crap would have been nice.
Police do unconstitutional things every day, as the growing number of court cases against them for harassing photographers shows.
Despite losing those cases, those same departments continue to repeat those acts.
The TSA has more power than a cop, does not need to meet probable cause to search, to confiscate, to detain.
They just have to wanna.
Ventura's case was 1. There are others, and they are quickly dismissed. Not because 'its legal' but for other reasons. 'wrong court', 'wrong defendant', 'wrong time of day'.
It's a shame that Texas bent their neck to the DHS's threats. A whole state putting the TSA at legal risk for their crap would have been nice.
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
I guess we just disagree on it then. It passes Constitutional Muster because you are waiving your rights to seach and seizure when you willingly get into the line to be searched.
If people feel that strongly about the issue they need to fight it in court and get a ruling. I did a quick search and couldnt find any serious legal challenges Im sure the ACLU would love to jump on this if there was a case.
I'm saying the constitutionality is debatable. Not saying it isn't constitutional, just that it's not been established. So, we're kinda on the same page there, or closer than it would seem. I'm less concerned with the legality (as I think it most likely is, to a point) as the implementation, which has so far been proven to be ineffective, and run by poorly trained people implemented inconsistently. An area I think we're in agreement on, to a point.
If the issue is that they can't do their job at an efficient speed due to manpower, then we need more people on the line.
If the issue is that they can't do their job correctly due to training, then they need better training.
If the issue is that they can't do their job honestly, then we need better pre-screening prior to hiring.
If the issue is that they can't do their job because they are sex offenders, then we need better pre-screening prior to hiring.
It comes down to hiring good honest people, training them properly, and giving them an efficient system to work within.
What we have is thieves and perverts, abusing trust, misusing authority, and letting things through that are illegal and could place flights at risk.
That, is to me unconscionable, and needs to stop.
I trust the cop pulling me over isn't going to steal my mp3 player. I need the same trust in the guys checking for bombs at the airport.
I ain't got it. So I don't fly. I'll drive, even if it means I get to participate in a 'revenue enhancement stop' in NE Texas.
If the issue is that they can't do their job at an efficient speed due to manpower, then we need more people on the line.
If the issue is that they can't do their job correctly due to training, then they need better training.
If the issue is that they can't do their job honestly, then we need better pre-screening prior to hiring.
If the issue is that they can't do their job because they are sex offenders, then we need better pre-screening prior to hiring.
It comes down to hiring good honest people, training them properly, and giving them an efficient system to work within.
What we have is thieves and perverts, abusing trust, misusing authority, and letting things through that are illegal and could place flights at risk.
That, is to me unconscionable, and needs to stop.
I trust the cop pulling me over isn't going to steal my mp3 player. I need the same trust in the guys checking for bombs at the airport.
I ain't got it. So I don't fly. I'll drive, even if it means I get to participate in a 'revenue enhancement stop' in NE Texas.
For years now, if you enter certain nightclubs in New York City or Chicago, you get searched. Ditto some sporting events. Don't want to be searched, don't go.
Flying is the same. The "government mandated" part might not be Constitutional, but the searches themselves are.....
Bob I'll see you and raise you
From my untrained eyes, the whole agency needs reworking. THE most dangerous job in New England (as well as the rest of the country) is that of a fisherman. Highest mortality rate. Go to work and you stand the best chance of not coming back home. Get in to trouble, you could easily be hours away from help and may be able to do little more than hope that help finds you before Poseidon does. Yet the pay of a fisherman is 30something per year. If the fishing industry can find people that risk their lives for that kind of pay, the TSA could conceptually find people to do work for that pay (which is what Boston pays for an incoming officer) in a job with far fewer hazards, federal bennies and up to 35 percent retention bonus.
Consistency breeds credibility. The TSA is not always consistent (to put it charitably) in their actions. This hurts their credibility. I think the agency needs to be reworked with Deming cycles and quality management that can produce a department that runs better, with better people....without resorting to robbing the taxpayer in hopes of to attract more accomplished professionals with better pay. I don't know if they are doing tat now, but I have my doubts as to their continuous improvement metrics. TSA tends to bleed on a regular basis. Turnover was higher before the genetalia searches...I suspect it is even higher now, most agents don't like it any more than we do -- the 35% retention bonus speaks volumes.
Deming said in the 1960s that when a team focuses on quality, their quality goes up and their costs go down. When a team focuses on costs, their costs go up and their quality goes down. Agent turnover is expensive.....and you and I are all paying for it. Plus it leads to a drop in quality. The agents out there that are good at their job are probably good at doing a few things. If we lose the good ones and keep the bad apples, that hurts all of us.
Plan, do, study, act. Plan a process. Do the process. Study the results. Act on how it can be improved. The cycle never stops. A more consistent and effective department will result in better quality (more effective screening, greater approval by the flying pubic), at lower costs. Less turnover. Maybe they won't have to lean on 35% bonuses as a crutch to keep the good ones around. Maybe their retention will become high enough so that they raise the bar for entry and attract people with a better education. Right now one can be a HS dropout with a year of aviation screening and still qualify on paper. More demand will drive the educational and work experience higher, and result in better quality people.
Easier said than done, to be sure. Also easier said than done is creating a methodology that screens one-third of the entire world's air traffic. 10 Billion passengers per year is a helluva lot to manage. But we can do better than we are, I'm confident of it.
From my untrained eyes, the whole agency needs reworking. THE most dangerous job in New England (as well as the rest of the country) is that of a fisherman. Highest mortality rate. Go to work and you stand the best chance of not coming back home. Get in to trouble, you could easily be hours away from help and may be able to do little more than hope that help finds you before Poseidon does. Yet the pay of a fisherman is 30something per year. If the fishing industry can find people that risk their lives for that kind of pay, the TSA could conceptually find people to do work for that pay (which is what Boston pays for an incoming officer) in a job with far fewer hazards, federal bennies and up to 35 percent retention bonus.
Consistency breeds credibility. The TSA is not always consistent (to put it charitably) in their actions. This hurts their credibility. I think the agency needs to be reworked with Deming cycles and quality management that can produce a department that runs better, with better people....without resorting to robbing the taxpayer in hopes of to attract more accomplished professionals with better pay. I don't know if they are doing tat now, but I have my doubts as to their continuous improvement metrics. TSA tends to bleed on a regular basis. Turnover was higher before the genetalia searches...I suspect it is even higher now, most agents don't like it any more than we do -- the 35% retention bonus speaks volumes.
Deming said in the 1960s that when a team focuses on quality, their quality goes up and their costs go down. When a team focuses on costs, their costs go up and their quality goes down. Agent turnover is expensive.....and you and I are all paying for it. Plus it leads to a drop in quality. The agents out there that are good at their job are probably good at doing a few things. If we lose the good ones and keep the bad apples, that hurts all of us.
Plan, do, study, act. Plan a process. Do the process. Study the results. Act on how it can be improved. The cycle never stops. A more consistent and effective department will result in better quality (more effective screening, greater approval by the flying pubic), at lower costs. Less turnover. Maybe they won't have to lean on 35% bonuses as a crutch to keep the good ones around. Maybe their retention will become high enough so that they raise the bar for entry and attract people with a better education. Right now one can be a HS dropout with a year of aviation screening and still qualify on paper. More demand will drive the educational and work experience higher, and result in better quality people.
Easier said than done, to be sure. Also easier said than done is creating a methodology that screens one-third of the entire world's air traffic. 10 Billion passengers per year is a helluva lot to manage. But we can do better than we are, I'm confident of it.
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
I know lots of crabbers and fisherman here in the Chesapeake Bay and Ocean area and they make WAY more then 30 something a year. My father in law is a crabber he makes very good money. Last year he made over 40 grand in 3 months and took the rest of the year off. I watch the lobsterman and swords shows they are always bragging on making a few grand per week out there fishing.Bob I'll see you and raise you
From my untrained eyes, the whole agency needs reworking. THE most dangerous job in New England (as well as the rest of the country) is that of a fisherman. Highest mortality rate. Go to work and you stand the best chance of not coming back home. Get in to trouble, you could easily be hours away from help and may be able to do little more than hope that help finds you before Poseidon does. Yet the pay of a fisherman is 30something per year. If the fishing industry can find people that risk their lives for that kind of pay, the TSA could conceptually find people to do work for that pay (which is what Boston pays for an incoming officer) in a job with far fewer hazards, federal bennies and up to 35 percent retention bonus.
That applies to almost all Govt Departments not just TSA.
I agree with that
