Friday, March 14, 2008

Some of the Hardest Working Dogs in the Nation

So here we are in the year 2008, we have laptops as thin as a potato chip, cars that run on electricity or hydrogen and 400 channels of satellite TV beamed right to your living room…yet the best way we have to detect explosives in many environments is that 4-legged friend, the dog. That’s right, TSA uses all kinds of tools to ensure the safety of passengers; things like minivan-sized explosive detection systems How We Do What We Do: Baggage Screening, handheld liquid explosives scanners and many, many other devices but nothing out there today is as flexible or mobile as man’s best friend. None of these tools can search a plane in minutes or sniff a pallet of cargo without removing each individual box.

Today we announced that for the first time we will be training and deploying TSA employee-led canine teams to complement the 496 TSA trained and certified law enforcement teams stationed at 70 airports and 14 mass transit systems. These teams (one handler and one dog) go through the same exact training as our law enforcement teams but will focus on air cargo screening and be one part of our answer to screen all air cargo on passenger-carrying aircraft by August 2010. The handlers are all trained cargo security inspectors so they can cover both the explosive detection and screening side with their dog as well as making sure our partners are meeting their obligations from the regulatory side of the house.

Speaking of air cargo, some of you may not realize just how immense an operation it is to ship air cargo around the world. Commerce and customers have come to expect that millions of packages will fly around the world, arriving at their destination with amazing efficiency and accuracy. The volume is so large that, in addition to the cargo company’s trains, planes and automobiles, many packages often fly with your luggage in the belly of commercial passenger aircraft. Care packages sent to Billy in his dorm room or fruitcakes from your grandmother are sometimes stored below passenger’s feet, right next to suitcases. This is an important source of revenue for the airlines as well as a means for customers to get their packages on-time. Some less popular commercial flight routes survive solely as a result of the money brought in by transporting cargo.

Screening the large volume of cargo passing through the airports is a great challenge that TSA has been addressing since its inception. When the Baja Men so eloquently asked “Who Let the Dogs Out,” TSA answered the call by saying, “we did, we sir, let the dogs out.”

Since joining TSA in 2002 from the FAA, the expansion of the canine program has been huge but we are not stopping there. We plan to deploy 400 more specially trained bomb dogs in the next two years, 85 of which will be TSA teams (non-law enforcement teams) whose main duty will be to search cargo bound for passenger aircraft. The first 12 TSA teams graduated today and will be deployed in the coming months to Dulles International, John F. Kennedy International, Los Angeles International and Miami International Airports. So, by the end of 2009, we will have a force of about 800 bomb sniffing dogs from coast to coast.

While most of us are lucky if our family dog knows how to sit and stay, TSA’s specially trained dogs and handlers enhance the safety of the traveling public, one sniff at a time.

Make sure you read the canine article on the TSA web page.

100 comments:

Milwaukee Web Design said...

Are dobermann's really necessary? I hear some smaller dogs are just as adept at sniffing out certain substances and are much less intimidating to foreigners.
Milwaukee Web Design

Anonymous said...

Please use rescue dogs from shelters and pet rescue organizations.

I saw a demonstration of a Beagle by a TSO at the dog show in Boston in December. It was great PR, and the dog gave a great job! Currently there are almost 7000 Beagles/mixes of various ages on Petfinder.

Almost any member of the sporting dog group would be great at finding explosives or other contra-band. They are bred for hunting, flushing game and tracking. It is their job! Thats tens of thousands of various breeds that could be rescued and trained.

Anonymous said...

So it will have taken TSA NINE YEARS before it's at the point of screening all of the cargo on passenger planes?

So TSA does not screen all of the cargo currently loaded onto planes?

So TSA has decided that the risk of unscreened cargo has been an acceptable risk for nine yeas?

How on earth, then, do you sit there with straight faces and tell us that our shampoo is so dangerous we can't bring more than 3 ounces, or 3.4 ounces, or an unlabeled container of acceptable size, or whatever amount the TSO decides is acceptable that day, even though there's no such thing as a binary liquid explosive that could be used on a plane?

Why are the risks of unscreened cargo acceptable, and those of impossible liquid explosive fantasies dreamed up by a bunch of wannabe terrorists who didn't even have plane tickets, let alone a liquid binary explosive, not?

Anonymous said...

"Are dobermann's really necessary? I hear some smaller dogs are just as adept at sniffing out certain substances and are much less intimidating to foreigners."

The pictured dog is a German Shepherd, a member of the working group of dog breeds. They can be quite intimidating, especially if not trained properly. I'd be a little nervous about transporting them by air, or even getting them through security... Its not like you can just put them under the seat or in the overhead bin (really just kidding).

hawthorn said...

"Are dobermann's really necessary? "

I suspect the answer is no, since the TSA website article shows a Golden Retriever and the blog posting shows a German Shepherd.

Anonymous said...

Any chance the TSA will ever scale BACK its operations? You'll have inspection of all cargo, inspection of all checked and carry-on luggage with both X-Ray and the clumsy hands of your careless staff (http://www.jeremyjohnstone.com/blog/archives/2008/03/12/united-states-replacing-one-form-of-terrorism-in-the-sky-with-another/), scrutiny of passenger facial expressions and mannerisms, surveillance and physical access controls up the wazoo, a ban on beverages, an assumption that the different is deadly, people walking through metal detectors in their socks, a staff trained to intimidate... at what point do you stop adding features? At what point are we "safe enough" ? I used to enjoy flying, now, thanks to your agency I dread it and avoid it.

When will you be satisfied?

(And don't you dare say "When it is 100% safe to fly" or "Never" because those are ridiculously stupid answers and you'd insult my intelligence) At some point there will be enough security. WHEN?

Greg said...

Use of dogs is better than most other topics here - it is highly effective, it doesn't interfere with the passengers, and offers the mobility necessary in transportation.

Wonder what direction the comments go?

Trollkiller said...

Great, now not only do we have to deal with broken locks and stuff stolen out of our baggage but dog drool too.

Sorry I just know that no matter what you do someone will have a gripe with it. So I just figured I would be the first.

Personally I would not mind sniffer dogs in the screening area too, as long as they are well behaved.

Anonymous said...

You can call the dog handlers CIE officers.

Hey Bob, dogs can "read" human behavior better than any BDO, or any human for that matter.

Also, dogs have thousands of years of human manipulation under their collars. Don't let them teach you their tricks.... If you have a dog you know what I mean: sitting next to the chewed up couch/ pillow/ book/ kid's toy and they look up at you with that cute expression: Who me?.

You don't have the same option, however.

So don't think anyone will believe you whet you foist off the mess you made of our checked luggage on "the
TSA explosives dog".

This does give us all an great opportunity to have our pets mark our check in luggage, to further the Canine Information Exchange.

Anonymous said...

Will these dogs growl if you try to get their badge number?

"Great, now not only do we have to deal with broken locks and stuff stolen out of our baggage but dog drool too."

There is now reliable DNA testing for canines. We'll just have to make sure these dogs get vetted and are in the DNA data base.

Trollkiller said...

Anonymous said...

This does give us all an great opportunity to have our pets mark our check in luggage, to further the Canine Information Exchange.


That is one of the funniest things I have read in a long time. Gave me a fantastic visual.

Officer: "what is it boy?"

Sniffer Dog: sniff "it is a three year old beagle" sniff "likes long walks on the beach" sniff "Meaty Bones treats" sniff "and being scratched behind the ears"

Anonymous said...

Chris,

I'm glad you take the time to answer blog comments, even though you guys tend to ignore the questions that are difficult, and tend to give non-answers (e.g It's a super duper TSA secret!) when the questions get tough.

I'd just like to know, when are the tough questions about beverages (possible bombs! oh no!) being thrown into big trash bins all mixed together and the questions about TSA's poor track record handing delicate equipment like camera lenses going to be answered?

Also, how much security is enough security?

Trollkiller said...

I have to back Christopher up on this. Almost immediately after 9/11 the cargo requirements were tightened up.

No longer could you just walk up to the cargo counter, place your package, pay and go. Now you have to be a Known Shipper, you have to manifest what is in the package and they can and will open the package and check it out. Screw it up a couple of times and you lose your Known Shipper status.

If you think TSOs are bad, try dealing with someone that went from being just a grunt at Delta to someone that can stop your package due to a spelling error.

Anonymous said...

Dogs! Man's best friend! Great!

Let me point out a few of the benefits:

I don't mind if they sniff my socks, but then I'm used to more than that.

They are usually nice to people (except if, at least in my dog's case, you even TRY to touch their pig ear).

Dogs don't care about money, but they do like a rewarding job. They are very focused and they don't mind risks.

My guess is the explosive sniffing dogs will probably need a higher security clearance than the average TSO. I think the average traveler can understand the reasoning behind this.

Border Collies are great at herding, so you could see a vast improvement in moving passengers through the security points. Find enough Border Collies, and you'll find the general security level at the airports will show remarkable improvement. Border Collies are very intelligent dogs, too bad that won't rub off those pesky TSO's. Just bring plenty of treats....

In fact from my point of view, get rid of most of the TSO's and just use dogs. Too bad they shed so much, so expect the airport cleaning bills to be higher, but that's about their only drawback, IMHO.

This is probably the best idea, maybe the only good idea that TSA has ever had. One good idea is all it really takes, though.

Christopher said...

Anonymous said at 12:46, "So it will have taken TSA NINE YEARS before it's at the point of screening all of the cargo on passenger planes?

So TSA does not screen all of the cargo currently loaded onto planes?

So TSA has decided that the risk of unscreened cargo has been an acceptable risk for nine years?"


Actually, today and for several years TSA has only allowed cargo from properly vetted shippers to even get on a passenger-carrying aircraft. Additionally, cargo at all small airports is screened, we screen all "high risk" cargo (destined for a specific flight or point to point) and a percentage of cargo is randomly screened. For more info on cargo screening, click here. Using these TSA teams to screen cargo is part of our plan to screen all cargo on passenger-carrying aircraft by August 2010.

Also, TSA purchases German Shepherds and Belgian Malanois from breeders and breeds our own Labrador Retrievers, Hungarian Vizslas and a TSA-created cross breed of the two called a Vizslador. These dogs have the stature to do the job required, including standing on a seat in a plane and sniffing the overhead compartment.

Christopher
Evolution of Security Blog Team Member

Christopher said...

Anonymous said, "I'm glad you take the time to answer blog comments, even though you guys tend to ignore the questions that are difficult, and tend to give non-answers (e.g It's a super duper TSA secret!) when the questions get tough.

I'd just like to know, when are the tough questions about beverages (possible bombs! oh no!) being thrown into big trash bins all mixed together and the questions about TSA's poor track record handing delicate equipment like camera lenses going to be answered?

Also, how much security is enough security?"

Well anonymous, I can't speak to super duper secret TSA stuff because I'm only cleared for duper secret :-) Actually, I'll risk hijacking this thread to try to answer some of your questions here:

1) Liquids in the trash represent only one possible component of an IED. It's like have the slingshot but no rocks. No rocks and a sling shot is just a piece of wood with a rubber band.

2) I wasn't aware of a systemic issue of damaging camera lenses. All you shutterbugs out there, let us know on the blog and if it's a major issue, we'll look into it and post a response.

3) "How much security is enough security?" This is a really good one. It sounds cliché but we're focused on risk management, not every providing "enough security." That's why we layer our efforts and back them up again and again. The canines are a great example. They can sniff cargo one minute, then respond to an unattended package in the terminal the next. It's not about providing "enough security," is managing risk.

Hope this helps,

Christopher
EOS Blog Team

Dan Kozisek said...

Just curious. How long does it take to train a dog to say "do you want to fly today?" ?

txrus said...

Christopher said:

Actually, today and for several years TSA has only allowed cargo from properly vetted shippers to even get on a passenger-carrying aircraft.
********************************
Not to rain on your parade, Chris, but have you every actually tried to ship a package at your local post office? (USPS is, I believe, one of your 'known shippers'-heaven knows I see enough of the USPS mail being loaded into every plane I've ever been on!). Did you know that they now have automated machines in the lobbies of many of the PO's that will let someone ship a package w/o ever seeing a human?

Yeah, TSA might know who USPS is, but how does TSA know that everything coming from USPS is 'safe' unless it's being screened? And since we all know that it isn't, we seem to be back to square one which is TSA has no idea what is going in the belly of every commercial airliner in the sky today because there is no method or process in place for screening it.

Anonymous said...

With the turn over at TSA,
just think, in a few years:

"Ok, you've been cleared through security."

Huh?
* I was just sniffed by a dog? *

The supervisor just cleared you, MOVE!

The supervisor is- that dog?

He's been here longer than any of us....

Anonymous said...

God, for the sake of the dogs I hope someone really assures that they get good care.

Christopher said...

Hey there Txrus, as a matter of fact, I have shipped a package at my local post office. Darn nice folks down there too. I have seen the automated kiosks and am also personally familiar with the non-automated “big, blue boxes” on most street corners in America.

Mail is screened differently and is not part of the “known shipper” program.

Christopher
EOS blog team

Anonymous said...

"God, for the sake of the dogs I hope someone really assures that they get good care."

I'm sure that they live, train and work with their handler/partner. My guess is that they will be among the most respected members of the TSA.

Ayn R. Key said...

I was going to say "and this is important?" but realized this is good news. Dogs can sniff for bombs without stealing. More luggage can be searched less invasively than before.

But Christopher, the comment about how you duck difficult questions is true. Go back to the older blog post about liquids and the 3-1-1 rule.

Trollkiller said...

txrus said...

Not to rain on your parade, Chris, but have you every actually tried to ship a package at your local post office? (USPS is, I believe, one of your 'known shippers'-heaven knows I see enough of the USPS mail being loaded into every plane I've ever been on!). Did you know that they now have automated machines in the lobbies of many of the PO's that will let someone ship a package w/o ever seeing a human?


Sorry but that is untrue.
Aviation Mail Security Program
Because of heightened security, all mailpieces weighing over 13 ounces bearing only postage stamps as postage must be presented to an employee at a retail service counter at a Post Office.

Anonymous said...

"Go back to the older blog post about liquids and the 3-1-1 rule."

Or the multiple questions asking for a simple, yes-or-no answer to whether the wannabe terrorists in the London plot had a working binary liquid explosive -- a straighforward question TSA seems strangely unwilling to answer.

Anonymous said...

Oh, great. Now I can't bring home doggie treats for my dogs without having the luggage torn apart by an over eager dog.

Anonymous said...

"And remember Qualben, the bomb sniffing Vizslador now on duty at Oakland airport? If you're wondering how he got his unusual name—all of the new dogs bred by the TSA are named after victims of 9/11."

I guess no jokes about that...

txrus said...

Trollkiller said:

Sorry but that is untrue.
Aviation Mail Security Program
Because of heightened security, all mailpieces weighing over 13 ounces bearing only postage stamps as postage must be presented to an employee at a retail service counter at a Post Office.
******************************
Please go back & read what I wrote; I'm not talking about a box covered in stamps for postage, though that's certainly allowable, I'm talking about the Automated Postal Centers that are in most PO lobbies now that allow a person to put metered postage on a package & deposit the package for shipping w/o ever going to the retail counter. Having used them personally, I can vouch for their existence.

Anonymous said...

I am looking forward to the to the day when the TSO sniffs and wags me through.

Or marks me for a secondary by the German Shepard....

Anonymous said...

I changed to a hard side ski bag (SPORT TUBE )after my bag and skis were ruined on a flight. I have traveled with it 4 times, and three times the fastener which keeps the ski bag closed was not replaced, so the skis could just fall out. In fact, the last two trips the fastener vanished. There is even a sticker there on the case showing how to replace the pin . Is the TSA collecting these ? I even bought a different pin to close the bag on the way back from Reno 2 days ago....got to RDU and the bag was open.


Karen G

Anonymous said...

But will the dogs catch suspicious computers that do not have hard drives?

Anonymous said...

Judging by your "witty", "wise" and productive posts its no wonder you people get reffered for seconday screening, or have such a hard time getting through the checkpoint. Be cool next time you fly, and watch for dog bites.

Trollkiller said...

txrus said...

Please go back & read what I wrote; I'm not talking about a box covered in stamps for postage, though that's certainly allowable, I'm talking about the Automated Postal Centers that are in most PO lobbies now that allow a person to put metered postage on a package & deposit the package for shipping w/o ever going to the retail counter. Having used them personally, I can vouch for their existence.


My apologies, you are correct. I live pretty far out in the sticks so we don't get the fancy equipment, we still have to make due with personal service.

I assume what you are referring to is one of these.

In any case the package mail is handled by a person(s) in the processing center(s), so while you maybe able to drop and go the package is still checked. I will not begin to tell you about postal security but for the most part it is pretty good. While I may not know about fancy mail kiosks, as the only time I go to the lobby of the post office is to pick up my mail and we don’t have one, I can tell you the back end of the post office is a lot more hands on than you would imagine.

As a bulk mailer I’ve seen more of the back end then the front end. Mail that is placed on your plane is safer than the luggage that rides with it.

I will confess I personally have not looked at the back end in 5 or 6 years but I can only imagine (hope) that security is even better now.

Anonymous said...

"But will the dogs catch suspicious computers that do not have hard drives?"
Depends on what "bits" they can smell....

Anonymous said...

Karen this blog is about the dogs new to the screening force at tsa, not your skis.. Find the right forum for your ?'s...

Anonymous said...

When will Kip Hawley provide justification for the ban on very small knives?

Anonymous said...

"Please go back & read what I wrote; I'm not talking about a box covered in stamps for postage, though that's certainly allowable, I'm talking about the Automated Postal Centers that are in most PO lobbies now that allow a person to put metered postage on a package & deposit the package for shipping w/o ever going to the retail counter. Having used them personally, I can vouch for their existence."

I can vouch for those machines to. While you can get a package metered you will no be able to deposit it unless its very small. Anything package of a normal size you will still have to take to a window to get drop it off.

winstonsmith said...

Hi Christopher:

I'm actually all for the idea of using dogs to sniff out potentially dangerous explosive devices in cargo. I have roiled against TSA for not screening cargo in other posts on other areas of this blog, but the pooches are a great idea (see I'm not all about negativity). I do have a question in regard to your statement:

"Using these TSA teams to screen cargo is part of our plan to screen all cargo on passenger-carrying aircraft by August 2010."

What I want to know is how the TSA can justify taking 9 years to get 100% cargo screening in place when cargo screening is the one thing that TSA could possibly do that might stand a chance of making us really any safer in the skies than we were before 9/11.

I would also point out that your plan is to have 100% cargo screening in place. There is an old Hebrew proverb that translates to "Man plans, God laughs." I'm not saying that you won't have screening in place on the schedule you say you will. I am saying, however, that I have my doubts. I am also saying that the cargo screening is not in place today, nearly 7 years after 9/11, which after billions of dollars spent on so-called security in the terminals which has produced no demonstrable or measurable improvement in security which could have been better spent on this effort, is an affront to the American traveler and to the American taxpayer.

Kip Hawley has some serious explaining to do. Cue the tap dancing music.

Anonymous said...

I can vouch for those machines to. While you can get a package metered you will no be able to deposit it unless its very small. Anything package of a normal size you will still have to take to a window to get drop it off.

That is not universal. I have used those machines often and can tell you that I have encountered at least two that have large package bins attached that easily handled 1) a package slightly larger than a shoe box and 2) a package large enough to hold a well packed motherboard and video card being returned to the manufacturer.

The packages were weighed, metered and deposited without so much as seeing a postal service employee.

Anonymous said...

Nice "Fluffy" piece. Care to explain this one next?

http://pajamasmedia.com/2008/03/top_tsa_officials_in_cheating.php

Trollkiller said...

winstonsmith said...

Kip Hawley has some serious explaining to do. Cue the tap dancing music.


Good news, winstonsmith, according to this article Kip and all the senior management read the blog.

From the article:
Q. The TSA has its own blog (www.tsa.gov/blog). Have you received constructive ideas from the public or is that mostly venting?

A.(Kip) "Some constructive ideas and a lot of venting. A lot of people are alienated from the TSA. They tune us out. They don't care. We've got to bring them back, at least hear us, acknowledge that we exist. The way to do that is to be transparent and let them vent. Over time the comments are much more balanced. Nobody's sending lovegrams, but they're engaging on the topics and we're engaging back. Specifically, all the stuff about taking the electronics out of the bags _ that came up in the blog and we changed it. That whole stuff about diamond (self-select passenger lanes) and why can't you separate out _ that was in the blog. I read it every day and our senior leadership reads it."
****************
To Kip
We know you are there Kip, every time we are threatened with not being able to fly that day, we know you are there every time our luggage is torn apart and our stuff stolen, we know you are there every time we see a disabled person's sterile medical equipment molested, yes Kip we know you are there.

We hear you Kip, we just don't like what we are hearing. We don't like hearing TSOs have very limited whistle blower protection, we don't like hearing our TSA leaders are cheating, we don't like hearing the TSA has the highest turnover of any Govt. agency.

Yes it is wonderful that we can keep our electronics together or the diamond lanes. That is a good start, but please don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.

Those things are very minor issues compared to retaliatory screening, reading the private papers in a citizen's wallet, the destruction and theft of private property, or the threat of arrest if we complain about the shoddy treatment at the hands of bad TSOs.

If you want real suggestions have the blog team open up a thread for just that. No whining, no venting, just "here is the problem, here is my solution".

If you want us hear you, then talk to us. Don't rely on your underlings, they don't make the rules, you do. Your blog team does a fine job, but their answers are limited.

Just a few hints when dealing with people on the internet. (not trying to be condescending I just have no idea how much blog/newsgroup/chat room experience you have.)

Be honest, trust me there are basement dwellers that enjoy nothing more than proving "the man" wrong.

Don't spin, any attempt to put the "best face" on something will be met with sarcasm and strong correction.

If you screw up, and you will, name it, claim it, correct it and you will be surprised how quickly the screw up is forgotten.

Emotions are not easily ascertained. If you are making a joke that is not 100% clear as a joke, toss a j/k or ;-) at the end. If you look at the laptop thread you will see a few people completely missed Bob's joke about admiring the new laptop. Most of us got it but there is always one in every crowd.

Ok Kip, now that I have vented a bit and offered some suggestion, I want to ask a few questions with a bit of commentary.

1. Why do TSOs not have full whistle blower protection? I want the good TSOs to be able to root out the bad TSOs and managers.

2. Why are complaint forms so difficult to obtain? The traveling citizens want to be rid of the bad TSOs in the worst way. I am sure you do too.

3. When are you going to start a secret flyer program, similar to a secret shopper program? If you really want to find out what is right and what is wrong on the front line, this is the way to do it.

There you go Kip. I eagerly wait your reply.

Anonymous said...

There is no general comment group so I will ask my question here.

How is the Security effort advanced when a large part of your customers (and growing daily) do not trust TSA nor its TSO's?

It would seem to me that gaining the trust of the public would be job one yet there is apparently little effort given to this issue

Anonymous said...

Knives have nothing to do with dogs.. Can anybody understand the concept of blogging, and properly place their concerns/comments to the apporpriate forum..

Anonymous said...

"Judging by your "witty", "wise" and productive posts its no wonder you people get reffered for seconday screening, or have such a hard time getting through the checkpoint. Be cool next time you fly, and watch for dog bites."

woof... double woof, I dare you....

What are you trying to say?

Randy said...

Mail is screened differently and is not part of the “known shipper” program.

Christopher
EOS blog team

Does that mean all USPS packages that go onto a plane are screened for explosives?

Sandra said...

Since you chose to not publish my comment, which did not violate the rules, I shall try again:

Talk about mission creep: the TSA is now into breeding designer dogs.

The upside of this is that there should be dogs at each checkpoint to sniff for explosives. Dogs are much more intelligent than many of the screeners.

Anonymous said...

"Judging by your "witty", "wise" and productive posts its no wonder you people get reffered for seconday screening, or have such a hard time getting through the checkpoint. Be cool next time you fly, and watch for dog bites."

A bite would come from a poorly trained dog....

So, are you saying that a witty or wise mouth is grounds for secondary screening? Isn't this against your own policy? Or are you, on your own, just being insecure, and making empty threats?

Anonymous said...

"Michael “Mike” Restovich and fellow TSA senior executive Morris “Mo” McGowan ran a private security consulting company while working as high-ranking officials with TSA."

Specifically against their employment contract.

Care to comment about this bit of rot at the top of TSA, or the systemic corruption in general?

Jonathan Bradley said...

Here in Houston, the feds were recently conducting roadblock checks for all vehicles using a small public ferry. All cars were being searched without cause, indiscriminantly and dogs were brought out to sniff for drugs, etc... all in the name of security. It was big news.

As an author on maritime issues (you can read my book here Jones Act) I must say that I've never heard of this kind of thing.

John Bradley
Lake Charles, LA

winstonsmith said...

Thanks Trollkiller...

To your:

"Good news, winstonsmith, according to this article Kip and all the senior management read the blog."

I'll take a look at the article.. btw, I really liked your suggestions, especially the one about putting a "here's the problem and here's my solution" section on the blog. I don't always agree with what you have to say on here but I think you and I could sit down over coffee and have a genuinely reasoned debate about these issues because we can find common ground somewhere. That's what makes this country great.

Anonymous said...

Sandra said:

"Talk about mission creep: the TSA is now into breeding designer dogs."

Some TSA people are former Secret Service thus the Belgian Malanois.
Ratting terriers might be a better choice for the TSA.

There are thousands of shelter dogs that could be rescued and trained to do this work. The Boykin, the SC state dog, has its breed origins in a rescue dog, Stumpy.

Anonymous said...

"Knives have nothing to do with dogs?" Well, maybe...but you're going to continue to see the question on each new open blog subject until someone answers it. It wasn't answered on the appropriate blog. Dear Kip; If there is justification for the "no little knife" rule, explain it. If not,then change it!

Trollkiller said...

To winstonsmith

I am not much of a coffee drinker, but if you don't mind debating someone drinking a soda, I am there.

Of course you will have to be the one to fly to me.... I am not dealing with screening for a soda and debate. ;-)

Screener Joe said...

"How is the Security effort advanced when a large part of your customers (and growing daily) do not trust TSA nor its TSO's?"

I disagree with the basic premise of this question. The vast majority of the passengers I deal with as a screener are friendly and appreciative. I believe firmly that we are not dealing with a large number of dissatisfied passengers. We are dealing with a small number of very loud dissatisfied passengers.

Trollkiller said...

Screener Joe said...

I disagree with the basic premise of this question. The vast majority of the passengers I deal with as a screener are friendly and appreciative. I believe firmly that we are not dealing with a large number of dissatisfied passengers. We are dealing with a small number of very loud dissatisfied passengers.


From a USA Today article.

"The AP poll, conducted Monday through Wednesday, found that the more people travel, the less they like TSA.

But it also found that 53% of air travelers think TSA does a "very" or "somewhat" good job.
"

As you can see Screener Joe your experience is not typical, unless you consider 47% a small number of passengers.

If the vast majority of the passengers you deal with are friendly and appreciative that tells me that you have the customer skills that more of you coworkers need. I will bet you greet and smile when passengers are approaching instead of yelling and looking impatient.

I will bet you are like the good TSO my wife met in Oregon that would not let her take a snow globe in her carry on. He asked if she could call someone to pick it up for her. Luckily my wife's biological sister was still in the parking lot and could come back for the globe. My wife proceeded through screening and saw the TSO walk the globe to the edge of the security area and give it to her sister.

A tiny bit of courtesy extended that allowed my wife to keep a memento from the first meeting with her birth mother. And no she did not tell the TSO where the snow globe came from or what it meant to her.

Hopefully the good TSOs will stay while bad TSOs are washed away.

Keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

i am a screener and your comments make me sick. you complain our blog team doesn't answer your questions but for the most part none of you seem to be asking any. your comments are covered in sarcasm which shows your lack of intelligence.

as for whoever wrote about us not addressing the issue of passangers trusting us, well, TSA made a huge step in opening this blog, and you disrespect it in your jokes and sarcasm.

i find is funny that people hate the police, but then when they need help, the police are the first people they call. it is the same with TSA. you hate us, but i guarantee if they ended TSA and there was another terrorist attach you would be begging for us back. You wouldn't mind then taking off your shoes.

And you complain about your liquids, get the proper size and you'll be fine. if you don't comply, you don't fly. period.

and as for the annonymous person trying to be the boss of the blog "this is about dogs.. ask your questions about knives somewhere else." anyone can ask anything they want where ever they want. atleast the question about knives is an actual concern, unlike your sarcastic comments.

and i'll answer the question about the small knives being banned. knives are a treat. they are a weapon. that's that. if you want to bring your little knife, check your bag.

and i agree with the screener's comment about the passangers... most passangers are very pleasant. it is not a regular occurance of unhappy passangers, atleast at the airport where i work.

i've been reading these blog comments on my breaks since the blog opened and i always "bit my tongue" and didn't leave my own comments. but it was time for me to get these opinions of my own off my chest.

Anonymous said...

Trollkiller i completely agree with your comment to screener joe... i am also a screener and it sickens me at how rude some of my co workers are to passangers, and for no reason.


when i started this job my dad taught me the three F's

Firm, Fair, Friendly

i use those everyday at the checkpoint.

Anonymous said...

Screener Joe said...
"How is the Security effort advanced when a large part of your customers (and growing daily) do not trust TSA nor its TSO's?"

I disagree with the basic premise of this question. The vast majority of the passengers I deal with as a screener are friendly and appreciative. I believe firmly that we are not dealing with a large number of dissatisfied passengers. We are dealing with a small number of very loud dissatisfied passengers.

March 16, 2008 8:09 PM

Screener Joe, regarding the above would you care to tell us where TSA ranks amoung federal agencies vs public approval?

What, your ahead of FEMA? Good show!

Sandra said...

To anonymous screener who said:

And you complain about your liquids, get the proper size and you'll be fine. if you don't comply, you don't fly. period.

WRONG. The TSA will confisciate your liquids and you will fly.

You exemplify what is wrong with so many of your ilk: you don't know your own rules or you misstate them.

Justin said...

As someone who is currently raising a puppy to be trained as a service dog (could be for a blind person, could be for law enforcement... we'll see how he does), I am always happy to see more use of service animals.

I will note that travelling with our dog in training has been a challenge. TSO's sometimes are wonderful. They often go out of their way to help. Sometimes they use us to train new TSO's. (We're always happy to help).

Sometimes we have struggles. TSO's -regularly- require us to remove his leather leash and send it through x-ray. Obviously, this is unsafe, as would be requesting a blind person remove his/her dog's harness. Unfortunately, there appears to be a training gap here.

Repeated customer service requests via TSA's web site have resulted in:

1.) An email explaining that TSA will never require a pet to go through the x-ray machine.

2.) An email explaining that service animals are allowed to fly.

Unfortunately, the staff responding to emails appear to be responding without reading the inquiry - or understanding it. This leads to a situation where there is no avenue for us to find out "the correct procedure" or to communicate the need to address what is likely a gap in training.

Regardless, we'll continue to take our dog along, and comply with a smile to whatever request the TSO's make.

SeeSaw said...

Seriously???
To those of you who are going to complain about the BREED of dog that the TSA is using:

Get a life, and figure out how to use your time more constructively!!
(Whining and griping and moaning about trivial things is NOT constructive).

Anonymous said...

Chris,

I don't know if there's a /systemic/ problem with camera equipment being damaged, but I do know it's a complaint I hear fairly often among amateur photographers (of which I am one) that TSA is very careless when searching carefully packed equipment cases. For an example of just how careless, look around for the numerous links that have been posted to Jeremy Johnstone's blog, and his post on the careless treatment his delicate luggage received. The before and after pictures he posted are quite telling.

As for your "answer" on beverages thrown in the trash... you are dodging the issue once again! I am no expert on bomb construction but I do have a pretty good head on my shoulders. Here is how I see it: You are not stopping the bad guys from conspiring to bring multiple small amounts of a liquid explosive component on board. Mix your five little bottles of explosive shampoo together and BOOM. That's problem number one. Problem number 2 is that you are, for safety's sake, assuming that all liquids are potentially components of an explosive or other tool of destruction... right? Now, who's to say that coke bottle number 1 and coke bottle number 2 when mixed together aren't going to explode, catch on fire, or release a deadly gas ? Your slingshot and rocks analogy, while creative, provides no actual answer (i.e scientific proof or verifiable fact). You have once again answered the question with "It's a super duper TSA secret!" albeit not in those words.

From what I understand, you are assuming all bottles of coke are hostile. You then treat them extremely carelessly. It doesn't add up, and your refusal to address the issue in an honest and forthright way is not scoring you any points.

Ayn R. Key said...

Anonymous screener March 16, 2008 11:50 PM

find is funny that people hate the police, but then when they need help, the police are the first people they call. it is the same with TSA.

No, it's not the same. You do not actually fight crime the way the police do.

And you complain about your liquids, get the proper size and you'll be fine. if you don't comply, you don't fly. period.

What a splendid example of a screener you are. The problem isn't only that we are disallowed liquids. The problem is we know the rule is nonsense, baseless, without scientific merit. If there were scientific merit to the rule we'd be ok with it. There isn't, therefore we're not ok with it. We should not have to limit our liquids. You are very big on blind unthinking obedience.

Anonymous said...

Seasaw said
"Seriously???
To those of you who are going to complain about the BREED of dog that the TSA is using:

Get a life, and figure out how to use your time more constructively!!
(Whining and griping and moaning about trivial things is NOT constructive)."

I haven't noticed complains about the dog breed per say, so perhaps you should take your own advice.

Dogs are bred for certain tasks, herding, hunting, tracking, as service animals, so there is an interest in what breeds are being used, and what breeds might be more effective. It really does boil down to individual dogs, even from the same litter they can have great variations on the same skill set.

Dave X the first said...

I do think the dogs and the TSOs work hard at doing whatever it is they do. What I disagree with is whether what they do is worth doing in the first place.

As for previously asked but unanswered questions:

Why do some TSOs (TSA TSO NY) take unlabled containers?

What do I have to do to keep my tweezers?

Is the liquid limit 3 oz, 88ml, 3.4 oz or 100ml?

How much medical information do I need to share with TSA before I can take a bottle of water?

How many prohibited items get through undetected?

Is TSA worth 2,000,000 person-hours per day?

Is TSA worth a cost of 100 lives?

How does checking IDs improve security?

And is blogging TSA's best method of managing itself?

I look at TSA from a cost-benefit perspective, and have a hard time seeing how TSA can guarantee safety any better than the airlines did (or didn't).

In other words, how safe would twice as much TSA make us? Half as much TSA? If the differences are not measurable, isn't TSA just security theatre--something makes us think we're safe but doesn't really guarantee it?

Anonymous said...

sandra.

"WRONG. The TSA will confisciate your liquids and you will fly."

i am correct in saying "if you don't comply, you don't fly" meaning- when we give you your options one of those options is to surrender your liquids to TSA, if you don't want to do that, you don't fly. i am very well trained and i do know the rules.

Anonymous said...

Dave X said;

"I do think the dogs and the TSOs work hard at doing whatever it is they do. What I disagree with is whether what they do is worth doing in the first place."

"I saw a demonstration of a Beagle by a TSO at the dog show in Boston in December."

I posted the second quote. The dogs do not really have a long attention span, though it varies by the individual canine. They are probably good for a few hours a shift, they get bored, too. As a dog lover, I am happy to see that they are part of the "risk management" layering. I still would like to see you use rescue dogs, they could be every bit as effective as your breeding program dogs, less expensive, and would give a home and life to a dog that otherwise might be killed. I'd love to see those rescued dogs named after the 9/11 victims.

Trollkiller said...

Ayn R. Key said...

What a splendid example of a screener you are. The problem isn't only that we are disallowed liquids. The problem is we know the rule is nonsense, baseless, without scientific merit. If there were scientific merit to the rule we'd be ok with it. There isn't, therefore we're not ok with it. We should not have to limit our liquids. You are very big on blind unthinking obedience.


Ayn R. Key you are in luck, there is scientific merit to the liquid limit rule.

Two common household chemicals when mixed together in the right proportion will result in an explosion. Logically the greater the amount of chemicals in the correct proportions would result in a larger explosion.

Randy said...

Mail is screened differently and is not part of the “known shipper” program.

Christopher
EOS blog team

Does that mean all USPS packages that go onto a plane are screened for explosives?

earlier post above

It's an easy question. Why no answer? it has a direct affect on air travel safety and your lack of response is making me I'm feel less safe about flying.

Marshall said...

An anonymous screener said in response to a post by Sandra:

sandra.

"WRONG. The TSA will confisciate your liquids and you will fly."

i am correct in saying "if you don't comply, you don't fly" meaning- when we give you your options one of those options is to surrender your liquids to TSA, if you don't want to do that, you don't fly. i am very well trained and i do know the rules.


Unfortunately, many times the screener just grabs the "illegal" item and tosses it away, so the pax isn't even given an opportunity to discard the item. As a matter of fact, I've heard of one instance, second hand reporting, where a person was found with an "illegal" amount of toothpaste, and said something to the effect of "give it back to me and I'll take a later flight" (a small commuter airline with many flights per day between different cities) and the item was confiscated anyway. The pax was told that she had to finish the screening process and the "rules" required that the toothpaste be confiscated in order to properly complete the screening. That seems totally in line with everything I have read.

So no, while I'm sure you do often invoke the threat "do you want to fly today?" (which as I understand it you are not allowed to do), you can't keep a person off a flight because you will have already taken away the offending item.

Ayn R. Key said...

trollkiller spaketh thus:

Ayn R. Key you are in luck, there is scientific merit to the liquid limit rule.

Two common household chemicals when mixed together in the right proportion will result in an explosion. Logically the greater the amount of chemicals in the correct proportions would result in a larger explosion.


How many people do you see trying to take on gallons of ammonia? The necessary explosive is the binary liquid explosive, which cannot be manufactured mid-flight?

SeeSaw said...

Anonymous said...
"God, for the sake of the dogs I hope someone really assures that they get good care."

March 14, 2008 4:36 PM

Do you think that the people who choose to take on the task of highly training a dog, sharing his life and home with that dog every day, and work with that dog, and possibly even rely on the dog to protect them in a bad situation is going to abuse their "partner"?

What kind of response were you expecting with your stupid comment? A whole bunch of people smiling, clapping their hands, and patting you on the back because you uncovered a TSA dog abuse scandal? "Well, they do take water away from families, why wouldn't they beat dogs, too?

(in a whiney voice) "Oooh, but for the sake of the dogs! Those TSA people stole my SamsClub size bottle of shampoo, and that new beautiful steak knife set I just got as a gift from my dead mother. They made me check my golf club set. But what about the dogs?" (still in a whiney voice, but now crying.)"What will become of those poor dogs?"

You obviously don't know anything about a training program like this. If you did, you wouldn't be bleeding your heart all over your stupid posts!

Anonymous said...

"What kind of response were you expecting with your stupid comment? A whole bunch of people smiling, clapping their hands, and patting you on the back because you uncovered a TSA dog abuse scandal? "Well, they do take water away from families, why wouldn't they beat dogs, too?"

I'd actually be more concerned about you, personally, Seesaw. Dogs usually just do their job and don't get petty. You want to trivialize what has become a dialog that is beginning to show some positive results. Picking a 5 day old post to rant about hardly moves things forward, a sarcastic tone does nothing to improve TSA's image.

Personally I have two rescue dogs, and I have no idea how anyone could bear to see either of them mistreated, or could bear to part with them. Any dog officer that I can imagine would probably have similar feelings. I answered that same post shortly after it was posted:

""God, for the sake of the dogs I hope someone really assures that they get good care."

I'm sure that they live, train and work with their handler/partner. My guess is that they will be among the most respected members of the TSA.

March 14, 2008 5:25 PM"

Get a life, SeeSaw....

Trollkiller said...

Ayn R. Key said...

How many people do you see trying to take on gallons of ammonia? The necessary explosive is the binary liquid explosive, which cannot be manufactured mid-flight?


Since the 3-1-1 rule I have not seen anybody take gallons of anything on board.

Trollkiller said...

Anonymous said...

I'd actually be more concerned about you, personally, Seesaw. Dogs usually just do their job and don't get petty. You want to trivialize what has become a dialog that is beginning to show some positive results. Picking a 5 day old post to rant about hardly moves things forward, a sarcastic tone does nothing to improve TSA's image.


A swing and a miss. Seesaw was supporting the TSA on this one. Go back and read it again. Look at the last line this time.

"You obviously don't know anything about a training program like this. If you did, you wouldn't be bleeding your heart all over your stupid posts!"

SeeSaw said...

Anonymous (March 14, 2008 5:25 PM)
said:

"I'd actually be more concerned about you, personally, Seesaw. Dogs usually just do their job and don't get petty. You want to trivialize what has become a dialog that is beginning to show some positive results. Picking a 5 day old post to rant about hardly moves things forward, a sarcastic tone does nothing to improve TSA's image."

I say:
Don't waste one minute concerning yourself about me!

I support the TSA in their effort to use dogs to further enhance the screening procedures. What I am NOT in support of are the people who just automatically assume that the TSA is inherently bad, and that they are going to treat these dogs poorly.
The statement in question (Oh, for the sake of the dogs...) was made by the anonymous poster to elicit
an uproar by animal lovers everywhere. "The TSA is bad, they couldn't possible care for dogs".

Yes, the TSA using dogs is a good thing. Positive/constuctive dialog is a good thing. Ranting, whining, and ragging on the moderators...not good.
"Oh, for the sake of the dogs..."

SS

Anonymous said...

"Trollkiller said...

Anonymous said...

I'd actually be more concerned about you, personally, Seesaw. Dogs usually just do their job and don't get petty. You want to trivialize what has become a dialog that is beginning to show some positive results. Picking a 5 day old post to rant about hardly moves things forward, a sarcastic tone does nothing to improve TSA's image.

A swing and a miss. Seesaw was supporting the TSA on this one. Go back and read it again. Look at the last line this time.

"You obviously don't know anything about a training program like this. If you did, you wouldn't be bleeding your heart all over your stupid posts!""

Well, the original poster was doing a bit of hand-wringing, I just saw Seesaw's belated reply as a bit over the top. I realized that he is supporting the TSA and I actually agree with him in some respects, at least in regard to the probable quality of the dog training program.

I think that the training program is a good idea, though dogs have a limited attention span, and so the whole program will need to be greatly expanded if it is going to cover even the major airports. I have my doubts about the TSA's ability to cover more than a small fraction of the 450 airports (out of 19,000 landing fields in the USA) that they serve.

I am not convinced that the choice of breeds is optimum or that registered breeds as such are necessary. Scent dogs from the sporting group, especially ones that are field, rather than bench bred may be more effective. The Customs Service is using Beagles for finding contraband food items.
Golden Retrievers for instance, are somewhat over-bred and while they tend to be wonderful companion dogs, they might be better suited for search and rescue.

Anonymous said...

Is my question about the careless treatment of "potentially dangerous" beverages ever going to be addressed in a non-flippant way?

How about the multiple small bottles of bomb juice question?

Talking about slingshots and rocks is all very well and good Chris, but you saying "Trust me, I know what I'm talking about" doesn't really fly. The reason I'm here posting is because I DON'T trust you. I don't trust anyone that works for your organization. I am a law abiding, respectful and intelligent Canadian citizen, and when I fly in and out of the states your staff invariably do SOME kind of boneheaded thing in the name of "safety" and since I know my behaviour and mannerisms are being observed I don't dare even roll my eyes for fear of getting dragged away to some back room for questioning.

Chris, since you refuse to answer, let me answer my question for you:

TSOs treat beverages casually because /they know they aren't dangerous/. They know that my coke's not going to kill anyone if it mixes with some sprite in the bottom of the trash can, and you know it to. Your rules don't make sense in the real world and you refuse to admit it! So much for a dialog with the community.

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous (screener) 3/16/2008 11:50 PM..... Some knives are NOT threats. It is patently ridiculous to suggest that a knife with a blade less than 1&1/2" could be used to take over an airplane. Why won't TSA revisit the issue and determine at what length a knife IS a threat? Is it 3' or 4" (like pointed scissors), or what? At least officially acknowledge the question.

Pernellccs said...

Part of your security for individual's items is weak, i.e.
My wife has two artificial knees, so she is always pulled aside for detailed screening. While that if happening, her purse and other individual items come through the conveyor, and anyone can pick them up because you have no system to make sure that only the owner picks up the items. When I am with her I pick up her items, but if I were not there, anyone could pick them up.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Anonymous (screener) 3/16/2008 11:50 PM..... Some knives are NOT threats. It is patently ridiculous to suggest that a knife with a blade less than 1&1/2" could be used to take over an airplane. Why won't TSA revisit the issue and determine at what length a knife IS a threat? Is it 3' or 4" (like pointed scissors), or what? At least officially acknowledge the question.


The 9/11 hijackings were accomplished with box-cutters. Have you ever seen a box cutter? Compared to the smallest knife blade in existence, a box cutter razor blade is significantly less dangerous.

Anonymous said...

Please provide information on the new TSA program for canine handlers. Information Requested would be similar to what is found in a USA JOB search. Basic information for the blog could include, Title, Career Progression, Qualifications, Pay Band.

Thank you.

Leslie Mitchell said...

I think its pretty obvious that these people are professional and the dogs are kept up to the highest standards (both mentally and physically).

My husband trains dogs for a living for local law enforcement.

Lake Ontario said...

What are the advantages of Doberman's over other dogs? I would suspect other dogs would be just as adept at sniffing out certain substances.
Thank you!
Chad

Chuck said...

I agree - it seems that the use of the bigger dogs doesn't really serve a purpose other than for intimidation. I am no expert though so maybe they do have their reasons.

puturi said...

I also think that other dogs can be trained. Maybe someoane reply us why they use only dobermann's.

dog sitter said...

I do find that these dogs and their handlers are incredible and do a great job. I am sure that you will find that the biggest finds will always involve a dog.

stop dog barking said...

I was at a dog show the other day and a cop demonstrated using a dog to sniff through stuff that look like they're never there. Standing there, I couldn't help but remain fascinated by the power of a dog's nose. Doubt there'll ever be a better way than using a dog to be honest...

Sean Rudman said...

I read this article with interest as I own a german shepherd puppy. She is about 9 months old now and I've been very interested in higher level training than just sit and stay.

She is very smart and I would love to be able to challenger her and find out how far she can go.

I'm curious if anyone might be able to suggest an appropriate path for training her.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Baggio said...

Wow...I never knew that man's best friend would be so much more adept at doing the job than sensors and detection equipment...wow. I mean, it's just like you put it, in the age where we've got paper thin laptops and nanotechnology, they're still more proficient at their jobs. As expected of those who carry the title 'man's best friend'!

But, I really agree with what annonymous above said, in that, if at all possible, TSA should adopt some animals from the shelters and pet rescue organizations - this is a great way to help those in need. And, of course, they'll have to prove proficient in training as well, but if at all possible, this is another possible avenue to help those poor abandonned dogs, and achieving your goals at the same time.

As to what some people said, I detect a sense of apprehension with large canines used to screen cargo, in that they show aggression towards humans. Not true! I really believe that all dogs have a gentle nature, and when properly nurtured, this side of them will flourish. It's just unfortunate that some people's first encounters with dogs turn out to be traumatic ones, and develop a sense of fear. German shepherds can be real friendly, I've met a couple myself!

In the meanwhile, good luck with implementing the program!

Henri said...

It is crazy how you can train dogs and how the development has been on this area the last years. Just looking 20 years back it was nothing like what we see today. Amazing.

John said...

I have seen different reports or articles on how TSA uses dogs for many things it is not just explosives but for almost anything searching for hidden drugs, money etc. even ivory they have trained dogs to find and we are not talking they have to sniff in a small bag to find the stuff. They can put a small filter on a hole in a 20 foot container and with some sort of vacuum cleaner they gather dust from the container in the filter and just by smelling to this the dog can smell if anything is in there!

Gregg said...

I didn't come across this article until well after it was posted. It's wonderful that our four-legged friends are able to "show off" their natural talents! It would be very interesting to have a progress report on how this program has done since its inception - Possibly even with specific accounts of how valuable of an asset these teams have been to the TSA?

Dog Barking Control said...

These pooches are right up there with the border patrol dogs...although I expect that the border patrol get many more hits per day than the TSA dogs do.

Adam Brown said...

Dog training is such an effective way of getting the most from the dogs you own, whether they are for work or for pleasure. Most people will not require their dog to do the things that you train them for, but the basics should be available for all dog owners.

ashley jones said...

Hi there, we have learned so much from this post. Consider me a fan, and now that I have about cargo and the hardest working of the dogs, these dogs are deserving to be placed and featured in postage stamps.

Anonymous said...

Personally, I feel like dogs are one of the greatest gifts that God has give to us and I agree with the lady who said that they should be put on a postage stamp. All the wonderful things that dogs do for us is endless. Too many things to list. We have a rescue dog and I have never seen a dog with as much personality as he has. He thinks his job is to protect my husband, me and our other dog. And, then to just turn around and be our buddy and loving companion. Dogs are GREAT!

Melanie said...

When I was a little girl, my dad used to take us to Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Tx. We'd watch the handlers work with the dogs the military used. I don't think anyone needs to be concerned about the care these working dogs get. They are valued and loved partners.

dog training said...

I was going to say "and this is important?" but realized this is good news. Dogs can sniff for bombs without stealing. More luggage can be searched less invasively than before.

But Christopher, the comment about how you duck difficult questions is true. Go back to the older blog post about liquids and the 3-1-1 rule.

chance said...

The dogs would be much better behaved and more polite than the agents........