Friday, March 22, 2013

TSA Week in Review: Firearms, Grenades, Stun Guns, and More



Non-Metallic Tactical Spike Found With AIT  (DSM)
Non-Metallic Tactical Spike Found With AIT  (DSM)

Items in the Strangest Places –It’s important to examine your bags prior to traveling to ensure no prohibited items are inside. If a prohibited item is discovered in your bag, you could be cited and quite possibly arrested by local law enforcement. Here are a few examples from this week where prohibited items were found in strange places.

  • Officers at Des Moines (DSM) discovered an 8-inch non-metallic tactical spike in a passenger’s sock after he alarmed Advanced Imaging Technology.
  • A passenger at Philadelphia had forgotten about the switchblade in his pocket. Our officers reminded him about the knife after it was detected by Advanced Imaging Technology.
  • A 4-inch knife was discovered concealed under the bag lining in the pull handle mechanism at Westchester (HPN).
  • A passenger at Washington Dulles (IAD) was as surprised as our officers were when they discovered a knife inside her cane. She said that she bought the cane at an antique store and had no idea the blade was concealed inside.

3 large knives.

32 Firearms Discovered This Week – of the 32 firearms, 23 were loaded and seven had rounds chambered. See a complete list and more photos at the bottom of this post.

Loaded Firearm (MDW)
Loaded Firearm (MDW)
A total of eight inert/novelty/replica grenades were found this week in checked baggage. Two were discovered at Medford (MFR), two more at South Bend (SBN), and the others were found at Phoenix (PHX), Anchorage (ANC), Tulsa (TUL), and Las Vegas (LAS).

Inert Ordnance and Grenades etc. - We continue to find inert hand grenades and other weaponry on weekly basis. Please keep in mind that if an item looks like a realistic bomb, grenade, mine, etc., it is prohibited - real or not. When these items are found at a checkpoint or in checked baggage, they can cause significant delays in checkpoint screening. I know they are cool novelty items, but you cannot bring them on a plane. Read here and here on why inert items cause problems.

  • A total of eight inert/novelty/replica grenades were found this week in checked baggage. Two were discovered at Medford (MFR), two more at South Bend (SBN), and the others were found at Phoenix (PHX), Anchorage (ANC), Tulsa (TUL), and Las Vegas (LAS).

Stun Guns – Eight stun guns were discovered this week in carry-on bags around the nation at Baltimore (BWI), Burbank (BUR), Burlington (BTV), Denver (DEN), Kansas City (MCI), Minneapolis (MSP), San Diego (SAN), and San Francisco (SFO).

What Not to Say at an Airport – Statements like these not only delay the people who said them but can also inconvenience many other passengers if the checkpoint or terminal has to be evacuated:

  • An Amarillo (AMA) passenger arrived to the checkpoint visibly upset and during screening, he told the officer: “I don’t have any bombs, at least not yet.”

Miscellaneous Prohibited Items - In addition to all of the other prohibited items we find weekly, our Officers also regularly find firearm components, realistic replica firearms, bb and pellet guns, Airsoft guns, brass knuckles, ammunition, batons, and a lot of sharp pointy things -- to mention a few…



Firearms Discovered This Week

6 loaded firearms.
7 loaded firearms.


32 Firearms Discovered This Week – of the 32 firearms, 23 were loaded and seven had rounds chambered.You can travel with your firearms in checked baggage, but they must first be declared to the airline. You can go here for more details on how to properly travel with your firearms. Firearm possession laws vary by state and locality. Travelers should familiarize themselves with state and local firearm laws for each point of travel prior to departure

Unfortunately these sorts of occurrences are all too frequent which is why we talk about these finds. Sure, it’s great to share the things that our officers are finding, but at the same time, each time we find a dangerous item, the throughput is slowed down and a passenger that likely had no ill intent ends up with a citation or in some cases is even arrested. The passenger can face a penalty as high as $7,500.00. This is a friendly reminder to please leave these items at home. Just because we find a prohibited item on an individual does not mean they had bad intentions, that's for the law enforcement officer to decide. In many cases, people simply forgot they had these items.

*In order to provide a timely weekly update, I compile my data from a preliminary report. The year-end numbers will vary slightly (increase) from what I report in the weekly updates. However, any monthly, midyear, or end-of-year numbers TSA provides on this blog or elsewhere will not be estimates.



If you haven’t seen it yet, make sure you check out our post highlighting the dangerous, scary, and downright unusual items our officers found in 2012.



Bob Burns 
TSA Blog Team 

If you have a travel related issue or question that needs an immediate answer, you can contact us by clicking here.

94 comments:

Anonymous said...

Can you publish a list of the top 10 or 15 airports where guns are found?

RB said...

Missing from the Big Catch List:

One Marine Wounded Warrior brutalized by TSA Screeners.

Anonymous said...

After the 2012 ABC News story that tracked a stolen iPad to a TSA officer's home, a reasonable person would believe yet another TSA officer from the same airport would not be caught stealing a trackable computing device. Sadly, that is NOT the case.

The following story was published by a local Orlando news station today, ..."Orlando TSA officer arrested, accused of stealing tourist's computer"

Does the TSA really hold its workforce to the "highest ethical standards?"

Anonymous said...

Americans have become lazily uninformed. Media, newspapers, magazines, we only believe what we want to hear or read. The tabloid news that you once scoffed at in the local supermarket has you reeled in like a big game fish.

Open your eyes, get involved, and begin to see a larger picture. Once informed fully then by all means draw a conclusion.

Individual's ability to form their own opinion has been lost, but they will say that is my American right.

By all means continue your objectivity, but please do it with some credibility.

Anonymous said...

So this week using whole body scanners you found a knife marginally larger than the ones you allow and put it front and center because it is "non-metalic"? Please.

No one could bring an airplane down with that now that cockpits are secure. It is not a threat. There are many allowed items more dangerous than that.

You still find absolutely nothing with your expensive, invasive and slow machines.

Anonymous said...

Oooh- something for next week's Week in Review:

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/orlando-tsa-officer-arrested-accused-stealing-tour/nW2ZG/

"Orlando TSA officer arrested, accused of stealing tourist's computer"
"An honest tourist found a bag sitting in Orlando International Airport and turned it over to a Transportation Security Administration officer. Police say instead of taking it to lost and found, the TSA officer took it home."

tramky said...

And not a peep about the incident that should raise EVERYONE's hairs on the back of their neck: the impersonator who got into the cockpit of an airliner after passing through all airport security.

So much for TSA security, so much for cockpit doors. And this guy was discovered, once again, by flight crew, NOT by airport security or their procedures. IN THE COCKPIT, IN A SEAT IN THE COCKPIT!

But the TSA regales us with tales of discoveries of unloaded handguns and inert hand grenades, not to mention the thousands of gallons of water 'confiscated' at TSA checkpoints.

Anonymous said...

Too bad my small commemorative pocket knife packed in my checked baggage did not have a tracking chip. Maybe that would have caught the TSA agent who checked the bag and left a printed notice that the bag had been opened & checked but no did not state that my knife had been stolen.

Anonymous said...

RE "Does the TSA really hold its workforce to the "highest ethical standards?"

Yes. With thousands of officers handling millions of items every day, TSA's theft rate is actually quite low. The agency and its personnel are highly visible in the press and the public eye. Continue to decry and denounce each conviction, but remember that a thief that is caught in your community does not necessarily mean that you, your family, and all your neighbors are dishonest, does it?

As a Transportation Security Officer working hard to keep all passengers safe, I must be careful even when someone leaves a penny behind in a bin or on the floor to make certain that I visibly turn in the penny, to avoid coming under scrutiny as a possible thief.

SSSS for some reason said...

Score TWO for the fancy scanning machines!

Then subtract one because basic WTMD technology would have found the switchblade.

And really? A switchblade? Who carries a switchblade anymore. Are you sure it wasn't just a regular knife and you are taking poetic license with the moniker?

Anonymous said...

The wounded warrior came out and said the media and his friends were wrong and blew everything out of proportion; and that he was not made to take his prosthetic off that was just something the media said.

RB said...

Anonymous said...
The wounded warrior came out and said the media and his friends were wrong and blew everything out of proportion; and that he was not made to take his prosthetic off that was just something the media said.

March 24, 2013 at 1:06 AM
.........................

A link to the story or article where this was stated would be most helpful.

Anonymous said...

Re: "remember that a thief that is caught in your community does not necessarily mean that you, your family, and all your neighbors are dishonest, does it?"

The aforementioned analogy is false and flawed. The repeated airport thefts are coming from within your "family", the TSA. The very fact that you say "With thousands of officers handling millions of items every day, TSA's theft rate is actually quite low." is unacceptable. How many private companies would remain in business over the long term with similar dismissive explanations to their customers? I suspect none.

Anonymous said...

"... but remember that a thief that is caught in your community does not necessarily mean that you, your family, and all your neighbors are dishonest, does it?"

I don't interview and conduct background checks on the people who want to move into my community.

On another subject, where is the video of the Marine, TSA?

Anonymous said...

RE: "remember that a thief that is caught in your community does not necessarily mean that you, your family, and all your neighbors are dishonest, does it?"

RE: The aforementioned analogy is false and flawed. The repeated airport thefts are coming from within your "family", the TSA. The very fact that you say "With thousands of officers handling millions of items every day, TSA's theft rate is actually quite low." is unacceptable. How many private companies would remain in business over the long term with similar dismissive explanations to their customers? I suspect none.

You twisted and skewed the man's words to fit your agenda. Bad apples exist within many organizations GOV and private. The honest individuals working for TSA far outweight the dishonest.

Take for example WalMart, Fred Meyer, Albertsons, JC Penney, and numerous other entities. You do not think these companies remain in business with a small percentage of bad apples?

You and your fellow bloggers within this website have lost credibility. You refuse to listen to any reason or sound judgement, and continually skew people's words to fit your agenda.

I much like many others (non TSA) find your blog responses more comical than credible.

Speak with facts; the truth is bound to follow.

Anonymous said...

RE: tramky said...
And not a peep about the incident that should raise EVERYONE's hairs on the back of their neck: the impersonator who got into the cockpit of an airliner after passing through all airport security.

So much for TSA security, so much for cockpit doors. And this guy was discovered, once again, by flight crew, NOT by airport security or their procedures. IN THE COCKPIT, IN A SEAT IN THE COCKPIT!

But the TSA regales us with tales of discoveries of unloaded handguns and inert hand grenades, not to mention the thousands of gallons of water 'confiscated' at TSA checkpoints.

___________________________________
On any account what does this have to do with TSA? By all reports he only began impersonating a crew member after being refused business class seating.

Do we want TSA in the plane during boarding as well??

"In today's world we must always research for truth."

Anonymous said...

Somebody should eliminate the ability for individual posters to have links to any business within their username.

This might eliminate the blog posts with only one agenda in mind. Refuse the truth or common sense at all costs to sell some T-shirts or other apparel.

Just saying!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Take for example WalMart, Fred Meyer, Albertsons, JC Penney, and numerous other entities. You do not think these companies remain in business with a small percentage of bad apples?

Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that steals from their customers. The TSA 'allows him to resign'.

Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that sexually gropes their customers. The TSA allows it.

Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that spies on their naked customers (like in a fitting room). The TSA puts up scanning machines to allow their employees to see passengers naked.

See the difference??

Anonymous said...

Re: "Speak with facts; the truth is bound to follow."

I completely agree. Let's start with some facts. ABC News reported in 2012 that Orlando was in the top 20 airports where TSA officers have been fired for theft.

Anonymous said...

RE: Anonymous said….
RE: Anonymous said...
Take for example WalMart, Fred Meyer, Albertsons, JC Penney, and numerous other entities. You do not think these companies remain in business with a small percentage of bad apples?

1. Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that steals from their customers. The TSA 'allows him to resign'.

2. Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that sexually gropes their customers. The TSA allows it.

3. Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that spies on their naked customers (like in a fitting room). The TSA puts up scanning machines to allow their employees to see passengers naked.

See the difference??
_______________________________________________________________________________
4. Well here we go show me proof the TSA allows them to resign and is not fired! You posters continue an escapade on show me proof, you need to back up your statements with proof. And I mean real proof, research and analyze. This world is filled with one sided biased articles, you need to find answers, not take any one single article as truth on any matter.
5. Do you really believe Congress and the United States of America would allow it’s constituents to be sexually groped? Remember TSA is a government bureaucracy with many individuals making choices on policy based on endless amounts of information. “Sexually groped” is a strong term for the associated search. What should TSA do allow an area unsearchable? You deem an area unsearchable you open a whole new can of worms?
6. At which Airport has TSA spied on anybody naked? Need proof here, have you actually seen the images produced? Or are you running off baseless lies and propaganda. On another note hasn’t TSA done away with individuals looking at images that never produced a single naked image to begin with? If you were up on your news you would know the truth!
(Also please do not just post links to individual resigns, because it is easily searchable to find many other links to individuals being fired for wrongful action.) You owe your “followers” that much. Or wait, this is not about the truth is it?

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...
Re: "Speak with facts; the truth is bound to follow."

I completely agree. Let's start with some facts. ABC News reported in 2012 that Orlando was in the top 20 airports where TSA officers have been fired for theft.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Awesome did you just not state TSA allows them to resign, but this article says they were fired? Again, bad apples exist within every organization. TSA works directly with the public and is in the public eye constantly. It is regrettable within any organization large or small when one person’s actions can affect an entire agency. As you can see individuals have and are held accountable for their discretions, this however should never justify vilifying countless officers who display integrity and class each day.

Wintermute said...

Anonymous said...
RE "Does the TSA really hold its workforce to the "highest ethical standards?"

Yes. With thousands of officers handling millions of items every day, TSA's theft rate is actually quite low


It is considerably higher than the number of terrorists attempting to take over aircraft, yet the flying public doesn't get a break. Why should the TSA?

Anonymous said...

5. Do you really believe Congress and the United States of America would allow it’s constituents to be sexually groped? Remember TSA is a government bureaucracy with many individuals making choices on policy based on endless amounts of information. “Sexually groped” is a strong term for the associated search. What should TSA do allow an area unsearchable? You deem an area unsearchable you open a whole new can of worms?

--------------------------------

I don't know if it would be called groping, but I've had my genitals touched repeatedly by the TSA at multiple airports. They called it "resistance" but I know what they are touching.

You may ask why the TSA is touching me like that. I wear an insulin pump that cannot go through the body scanners or the baggage x-ray per the manufacturer. I'm not going to risk damage to a life sustaining device, so I am forced to be touched by the TSA in what I feel is inappropriate and excessive. The other option is to not fly, but that really isn't an option for me.

Anonymous said...

RE: RB said...
Missing from the Big Catch List:

One Marine Wounded Warrior brutalized by TSA Screeners
_______________________________

Posting unsubstantiated information perpetuates exaggerated half truths.

RB said...

Awesome did you just not state TSA allows them to resign, but this article says they were fired? Again, bad apples exist within every organization. TSA works directly with the public and is in the public eye constantly. It is regrettable within any organization large or small when one person’s actions can affect an entire agency. As you can see individuals have and are held accountable for their discretions, this however should never justify vilifying countless officers who display integrity and class each day.


March 25, 2013 at 7:38 AM
....................
TSA employees all get back ground checks or at least they are suppose to. Yet TSA has hired at least one known felon. Pretty low standards to work for TSA as demonstrated.

Anonymous said...

It is regrettable within any organization large or small when one person’s actions can affect an entire agency. As you can see individuals have and are held accountable for their discretions, this however should never justify vilifying countless officers who display integrity and class each day.

TSA exists because of the actions of a few. Passengers, who display integrity and class every day are vilified by the TSA and made to remove our shows, and be groped "to resistance" because of the actions of a few.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"The wounded warrior came out and said the media and his friends were wrong and blew everything out of proportion; and that he was not made to take his prosthetic off that was just something the media said." March 24, 2013 at 1:06 AM


As RB said, please provide a link to your source. I did an online search and found nothing supporting your claims.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
4. Well here we go show me proof the TSA allows them to resign and is not fired! You posters continue an escapade on show me proof, you need to back up your statements with proof.

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/orlando-tsa-officer-arrested-accused-stealing-tour/nW2ZG/

"An honest tourist found a bag sitting in Orlando International Airport and turned it over to a Transportation Security Administration officer. Police say instead of taking it to lost and found, the TSA officer took it home."
...
"McKnight was interviewed at the airport. Police say he initially lied, but eventually admitted he took the computer. He was arrested and resigned from his job."

Note, he was not fired- he "resigned from his job".

(Also please do not just post links to individual resigns, because it is easily searchable to find many other links to individuals being fired for wrongful action.) You owe your “followers” that much. Or wait, this is not about the truth is it?

So, I'm not allowed to post any proof, even after you just asked for it? Nice.

And you're right, there ARE "many" other cases where the TSA screeners have stolen from passengers (and gotten caught- imagine how many haven't gotten caught yet!). That just proves the case that the TSA is rotten to the core and needs to be disbanded. Thanks for proving my point!

Do you really believe Congress and the United States of America would allow it’s constituents to be sexually groped? Remember TSA is a government bureaucracy with many individuals making choices on policy based on endless amounts of information. “Sexually groped” is a strong term for the associated search.

Oh, please. A simple internet search for 'tsa grope' brings up thousands of results. Including from a former Miss USA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6hvUWv2CsY
And, yes, it even happens to congressmen: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/04/25/i-moved-his-hand-away-congressman-claims-tsa-agent-got-a-little-too-gropey/
"U.S. Rep. Francisco Canseco said he was assaulted by a TSA agent at the San Antonio International Airport.

The Texas Congressman said the security agent went too far during a pat-down earlier this month.

“The agent was very aggressive in his pat-down, and he was patting me down where no one is supposed to go,” said Canseco. “It got very uncomfortable so I moved his hand away. That stopped everything and brought in supervisors and everyone else.”"

The TSA's own instructions are to 'move their hand up your inner thigh until they meet "resistance"'. Exactly what part might they then be touching, if not a sexual one??

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2012/10/11/what-does-the-tsa-mean-by-resistance-in-a-pat-down/
"What Does The TSA Mean By “Resistance” In A Pat Down?"
"The resistance pressure a person will experience during an enhanced pat down is much like going to a doctor for a hernia test... “"
"From experience I know Officers have in fact located hidden items under a traveler’s scrotum, under a woman’s breasts and in their posterior."

What, exactly, would you consider "under a scrotum" , "under a woman’s breasts", and "in their posterior", if not sexual areas??

At which Airport has TSA spied on anybody naked? Need proof here, have you actually seen the images produced? Or are you running off baseless lies and propaganda.

Baseless lies and propaganda? How about the TSA's own website??? Take a look at this:
http://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/images/backscatter_large.jpg
and tell me it isn't explicit.

Or the picture attached to this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_body_scanner

Anonymous said...

Re: "As you can see individuals have and are held accountable for their discretions, this however should never justify vilifying countless officers who display integrity and class each day."
***********************************
I do not think that ANYONE who gropes strangers as part of their job description (like the TSA) has integrity OR class. And yes, I do think Congress would allow average Americans to be groped. Just ask Senator McCaskill about her recent "aggressive patdown" experience. Outside of the confines of a US airport checkpoint Senator McCaskill's recent "aggressive patdown" would be considered sexual assault. I suggest that the TSA provide the "facts" to average American families who may be subject to the same "aggressive patdowns".

Your retorts seem to be short on "proof" and long on biased opinion. I suggest you follow your own advice before you are so quick to defend the TSA.

Anonymous said...

One bad guy brings a bomb in his shorts and now we all get our junk inspected or bombarded with radiation because we want to travel. Good thing we bailed out the airlines.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
5. Do you really believe Congress and the United States of America would allow it’s constituents to be sexually groped? Remember TSA is a government bureaucracy with many individuals making choices on policy based on endless amounts of information. “Sexually groped” is a strong term for the associated search. What should TSA do allow an area unsearchable? You deem an area unsearchable you open a whole new can of worms?
______________________________
RE: I don't know if it would be called groping, but I've had my genitals touched repeatedly by the TSA at multiple airports. They called it "resistance" but I know what they are touching.
________________________________
RE: You may ask why the TSA is touching me like that. I wear an insulin pump that cannot go through the body scanners or the baggage x-ray per the manufacturer. I'm not going to risk damage to a life sustaining device, so I am forced to be touched by the TSA in what I feel is inappropriate and excessive. The other option is to not fly, but that really isn't an option for me.
_________________________________
So you propose no screening for an individual that is wearing an insulin pump? Or you propose less screening for an individual with an insulin pump? What is your solution, do you have one? I do not understand your position?

Your solution it seems is to leave an area un-screen able? Then when something tragic occurs railroad the TSA for not doing enough. Give solutions, not just repeated rhetoric. Genitals are never maliciously touched or sought out for touch in any screening process I have been through?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
RE "Does the TSA really hold its workforce to the "highest ethical standards?"

RE: Yes. With thousands of officers handling millions of items every day, TSA's theft rate is actually quite low
_________________________________
RE: It is considerably higher than the number of terrorists attempting to take over aircraft, yet the flying public doesn't get a break. Why should the TSA?
And you know how many terrorists have attempted to board an aircraft?
_______________________________
Nobody may know how many are testing the system. After all isn’t it common knowledge the 9-11 hijackers tested the system for 10 years before they struck?

Anonymous said...

RB said...
RE: Awesome did you just not state TSA allows them to resign, but this article says they were fired? Again, bad apples exist within every organization. TSA works directly with the public and is in the public eye constantly. It is regrettable within any organization large or small when one person’s actions can affect an entire agency. As you can see individuals have and are held accountable for their discretions, this however should never justify vilifying countless officers who display integrity and class each day.
_____________________________
TSA employees all get back ground checks or at least they are suppose to. Yet TSA has hired at least one known felon. Pretty low standards to work for TSA as demonstrated.
_______________________________
Within in all agencies and startups you have growing pains. Do you know all of the issues and problems with background checks? Can a background check be duped? If you are hiring 37,000 individuals to start a brand new agency could a few fall through the cracks? Mistakes can happen right? No other government agency has hired a felon? No other government agency has the few individuals that can tarnish an agency?
Again one person’s actions should never vilify the integrity and class of countless officers!

Anonymous said...

It is regrettable within any organization large or small when one person’s actions can affect an entire agency. As you can see individuals have and are held accountable for their discretions, this however should never justify vilifying countless officers who display integrity and class each day.
______________________________
RE: TSA exists because of the actions of a few. Passengers, who display integrity and class every day are vilified by the TSA and made to remove our shows, and be groped "to resistance" because of the actions of a few.
___________________________________
Yes and again what did those actions cause? Have we been quick to forget the devastation of that day?

Removing shoes or shows? “I don't know if it would be called groping”, did you not type that above? Anyway the screening process to me seems to be a proactive approach to the current threat. Even the administrator for TSA explains it well when he says, with proactive passengers and hardened cockpits the threat has changed. In order to mitigate that threat the screening must involve a proactive approach, I would hope?
What do you propose? Or do you just spew empty rhetoric with no solution?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
RE: "The wounded warrior came out and said the media and his friends were wrong and blew everything out of proportion; and that he was not made to take his prosthetic off that was just something the media said." March 24, 2013 at 1:06 AM
_______________________________
RE: As RB said, please provide a link to your source. I did an online search and found nothing supporting your claims
_________________________________
Never made this claim, this was somebody else. I cannot provide a link, but it is well documented the marine was not the one making the claim it was his traveling party. I know I have seen in the media as much video as plausibly possible and found no instance of the removal. Do you have video of the removal of prosthesis? If so please attach = ), come on let us find the true story, then make claims.
__________________________________
Mr. Rand Paul is subjected to the same screening as his American constituency. He then has a problem with the process. He does not want to remove something or be screened in an area where machinery has alarmed. He begins a personal vendetta with 1.6 million in donations thus far to begin The END of TSA.
So instead of trying to fix TSA from within through a congressional approach, he takes donations to begin a campaign? 1.6 million is then flushed into the media system to begin a railroad campaign against TSA. Thus vilifying a whole agency for the actions of a few, instead of doing his congressional job of fixing things from within?
How is that for a conspiracy theory? Kind of sounds like the rhetoric displayed by many posters or just one, but probably closer to the truth?

http://www.hangthebankers.com/rand-paul-launches-campaign-to-end-the-tsa/

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
4. Well here we go show me proof the TSA allows them to resign and is not fired! You posters continue an escapade on show me proof, you need to back up your statements with proof.
http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/orlando-tsa-officer-arrested-accused-stealing-tour/nW2ZG/
_______________________________
You cut and paste only a portion of my statement. Granted maybe some are allowed to resign, but I have read articles where countless others are fired.
You said: ” Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that steals from their customers. The TSA 'allows him to resign.”
So him meaning only one, or them? Your wordplays are highly comedic! Figured I would wordplay myself.

Just punch in TSA Officer Fired in your search bar you will find many bad apples which every organization has!

RB said...

Anonymous said...
RE: RB said...
Missing from the Big Catch List:

One Marine Wounded Warrior brutalized by TSA Screeners
_______________________________

Posting unsubstantiated information perpetuates exaggerated half truths.

March 25, 2013 at 1:32 PM
..............
TSA posted unsubstantiated claims about the Marines screening. Not one shred of verifiable proof and we are expected to take that post as gospel?




Anonymous said...

RE: And you're right, there ARE "many" other cases where the TSA screeners have stolen from passengers (and gotten caught- imagine how many haven't gotten caught yet!). That just proves the case that the TSA is rotten to the core and needs to be disbanded. Thanks for proving my point!
________________________________
But you did not mention many are fired and do not resign? So you continue vilifying a whole organization for a small percentage of an agency? How did I prove your point, please explain?
100’s upon thousands of TSA officers have been hired with TSA and you select a small percentage to vilify; claiming then that the actions of a few represent an entire organizational mindset? How did you make that leap? How will privatization be any better? Will it stop thievery? You have proved my point!

Anonymous said...

The TSA's own instructions are to 'move their hand up your inner thigh until they meet "resistance"'. Exactly what part might they then be touching, if not a sexual one??
________________________________
With feet spread apart does the inner thigh meet what, genitals? If your feet are spread apart the search is conducted upon the area between the genitals and the inner thigh? Again when searched I have never had my genitals touched in a malicious or violent way. I do not know about you but my genitals are centered and not attached to my thigh?

Anonymous said...

Baseless lies and propaganda? How about the TSA's own website??? Take a look at this:
http://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/images/backscatter_large.jpg
and tell me it isn't explicit.
___________________________________
That is explicit to you? I do not see a thing in that image I find explicit? In fact I find it laughable and hard to see anything. Besides does TSA still use these machines? Last I read officers do not view non explicit images anymore. It is all computers based and the threat is found by a computer? But that would take reading and finding the correct information, rather than old and outdated propaganda? But even the propaganda you displayed does not fit the term explicit in any way LOL!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Re: "As you can see individuals have and are held accountable for their discretions, this however should never justify vilifying countless officers who display integrity and class each day."
RE: I do not think that ANYONE who gropes strangers as part of their job description (like the TSA) has integrity OR class. And yes, I do think Congress would allow average Americans to be groped. Just ask Senator McCaskill about her recent "aggressive patdown" experience. Outside of the confines of a US airport checkpoint Senator McCaskill's recent "aggressive patdown" would be considered sexual assault. I suggest that the TSA provide the "facts" to average American families who may be subject to the same "aggressive patdowns".
Your retorts seem to be short on "proof" and long on biased opinion. I suggest you follow your own advice before you are so quick to defend the TSA.
_______________________________
So again you use the term groping when you said yourself that you do not know if you would call it groping? So you do believe the issue starts with Congress and not TSA? All TSA employees make the rules that go into the security system? So you vilify a whole cadre of officers because they are instructed to perform searches you deem irreprehensible? Seems as though your priorities are out of whack and you need to go to the correct source to solve your issues? I enjoy spirited debate, but please man at least make it somewhat factual!

Anonymous said...

One bad guy brings a bomb in his shorts and now we all get our junk inspected or bombarded with radiation because we want to travel. Good thing we bailed out the airlines
_______________________________
What if that one bad guy would have succeeded? What do you think would be happening as far as screening goes now? I personally find it great the threat was exposed without killing countless people. Thus a procedure is able to be instituted that could prevent or hinder the ability for it to ever happen again. Or do we just leave it open to happen again? Amazing how you think there is only one bad guy plotting to do the same.

SSSS for some reason said...

" Anonymous said... So you propose no screening for an individual that is wearing an insulin pump? Or you propose less screening for an individual with an insulin pump? What is your solution, do you have one? I do not understand your position? "

You are obviously new to the comment section of this particular blog so allow me to bring you up to speed...

Those of us who speak out against the TSA want the charade of TSA making us safe to be stopped. We want the TSA removed from the actual screening process because the Government doing the screening is a violation of our individual Constitutional Rights. Private companies can do as good or better a job of screening passengers.

We want security to be provided so don't even try to jump to the illogical assumption that anyone is advocating for no security to be provided.

The security we want, we would like that security to be efficient and effective and appropriate to the level of risk. Walk-Through-Metal Detectors, for example, are fast, safe, effective and will catch better than 99% of all the stuff the TSA brags about in their weekly police blotter of items found.

In the case of insulin pumps, the passenger goes through the WTMD, it alarms, the magic want comes out and it is determined the only 'threat' is in the waist area at which point the passenger reveals their insulin pump. A quick visual inspection, maybe one of those magic swabs, determines that it is in fact an insulin pump and the passenger is on their way. Why does the passenger need their junk felt and their socks inspected simply because they have an insulin pump and can't/won't/shouldn't get in the x-ray box?

To sum up.... Security check points staffed by private companies who hire professionals who work under the set of rules and standards created by the TSA. Walk Through Metal Detectors combined with the random 'step aside please' swabbing for explosives trace.

And this last one is my personal request but it would be great if the security staff would have names badges that easy to read and a clearly defined process of who to talk to, when, and how, for complaints or compliments. Not the current system where Agents obscure their badge, cop an attitude when you ask them their name, and have supervisors who challenge you or intimidate you for asking to speak to a superior. IN short, the current lot are thoroughly unprofessional in their actions and attitudes. Not all of them, I am sure, but to date every single one that I have spoken with.

Anonymous said...

Nobody may know how many are testing the system. After all isn’t it common knowledge the 9-11 hijackers tested the system for 10 years before they struck?

And nobody knows how many TSA personnel steal, or for that matter how many might be testing the system.....

Anonymous said...

Again one person’s actions should never vilify the integrity and class of countless officers!

And yet the TSA uses one person's actions to vilify the integrity of countless passengers.

RB said...

You cut and paste only a portion of my statement. Granted maybe some are allowed to resign, but I have read articles where countless others are fired.
You said: ” Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that steals from their customers. The TSA 'allows him to resign.”
So him meaning only one, or them? Your wordplays are highly comedic! Figured I would wordplay myself.

Just punch in TSA Officer Fired in your search bar you will find many bad apples which every organization has!


March 26, 2013 at 10:19 AM
............................
" but I have read articles where countless others are fired."

See the problem here?

How many TSA screeners have to be fired or even allowed to resign before TSA takes some action and actually start vetting its prospective employees better and start to monitoring screeners conduct while working a checkpoint?

What TSA is doing today ain't working!


RB said...

Anonymous said...
RB said...
RE: Awesome did you just not state TSA allows them to resign, but this article says they were fired? Again, bad apples exist within every organization. TSA works directly with the public and is in the public eye constantly. It is regrettable within any organization large or small when one person’s actions can affect an entire agency. As you can see individuals have and are held accountable for their discretions, this however should never justify vilifying countless officers who display integrity and class each day.
_____________________________
TSA employees all get back ground checks or at least they are suppose to. Yet TSA has hired at least one known felon. Pretty low standards to work for TSA as demonstrated.
_______________________________
Within in all agencies and startups you have growing pains. Do you know all of the issues and problems with background checks? Can a background check be duped? If you are hiring 37,000 individuals to start a brand new agency could a few fall through the cracks? Mistakes can happen right? No other government agency has hired a felon? No other government agency has the few individuals that can tarnish an agency?
Again one person’s actions should never vilify the integrity and class of countless officers!


March 26, 2013 at 9:19 AM
.....................

You could hardly call TSA a startup agency in 2010.

Go ahead and make excuses for incompetence.

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/02/05/tsa-hires-felon-forces-airport-to-issue-security-badge/


"The TSA has recently hired a front line Transportation Security Officer who at the age of 17 committed felony robbery. Although a minor at the time of the offense, this person was convicted of the crime when they were 18, thus they were convicted as an adult and their records were not sealed. The TSA claims that since the crime occurred when the person was a minor it is not disqualifying crime … however they served their entire felony sentence as an adult and they have direct access to passenger’s personal property.

At the time the TSA TSO submitted their employment application, and again at the time they were hired, they failed to disclose their felony conviction to the TSA. All applicants are required to disclose a felony conviction within the past 10 years, as per FAR 108.33(c)(5). (*FAR 108.33(c)(5) has been replaced by 49 CFR Part 1542, I was directed to an outdated law by the FAA at the time I was originally seeking the correct regulations*)"

So the guy was convicted as an adult and TSA didn't bother to do a criminal background check before leaning on Richmond to issue a security badge? How come the airport was able to find this stuff out and TSA with all of its resources was not able to do so?

If TSA security is as good as TSA background checks then we are all in deep dodo.



Wintermute said...

Anonymous said...

"What if that one bad guy would have succeeded? What do you think would be happening as far as screening goes now? I personally find it great the threat was exposed without killing countless people. Thus a procedure is able to be instituted that could prevent or hinder the ability for it to ever happen again."

Those procedures that were put in place after Mr. Underwear Bomber are not working (see http://blog.tsa.gov/2013/03/clarification-on-covert-testing-at.html). Not that Mr. Underwear Bomber was a viable threat to begin with...

Leon said...

One person said, "One bad guy brings a bomb in his shorts..."

Someone replied, "Thus a procedure is able to be instituted that could prevent or hinder the ability for it to ever happen again."


Where do you draw the line on searching passengers' crotches for explosives? Why not have visual inspection of crotches and/or body cavity searches so that we can be 100% certain that a given passenger is not using his/her crotch for terror? Does it matter to you if there is no reasonable basis (i.e., probable cause) for searching the passenger to that extent? At some point, security procedures become overly invasive and provide no value.

I happen to think we reached that point when the whole body imagers were put to use in primary screening without the required public comment period. (The public comment period appears to have finally begun, for what it's worth.)

Screen shot.

Anonymous said...

RE: Those of us who speak out against the TSA want the charade of TSA making us safe to be stopped. We want the TSA removed from the actual screening process because the Government doing the screening is a violation of our individual Constitutional Rights. Private companies can do as good or better a job of screening passengers.
___________________________________________________
Charade and how do you know it is not making us safe?? Just the same us how do we know if it is making us safe?? You are making baseless claims! Violation of your individual Constitutional Rights, how? The 9th Circuit Court of the United States ruled on this in 1973! Please become informed before making baseless statements!

Also under law wouldn't private companies have to follow current TSA procedures? How would this be better in your eyes? You are know funding a private company through government anyway, with the same procedures.

Anonymous said...

RE: The security we want, we would like that security to be efficient and effective and appropriate to the level of risk. Walk-Through-Metal Detectors, for example, are fast, safe, effective and will catch better than 99% of all the stuff the TSA brags about in their weekly police blotter of items found.
___________________________________________________
Are you a security expert, I am surely not? What is the level of risk associated with your screening procedures indicated? Do Metal Detectors catch non-metallic threats to aviation? I don't think so that is why they are called metal detectors. How would you suggest we catch non-metallic threats? Again your claims are completely unsubstantiated!

Anonymous said...

RE: In the case of insulin pumps, the passenger goes through the WTMD, it alarms, the magic want comes out and it is determined the only 'threat' is in the waist area at which point the passenger reveals their insulin pump. A quick visual inspection, maybe one of those magic swabs, determines that it is in fact an insulin pump and the passenger is on their way. Why does the passenger need their junk felt and their socks inspected simply because they have an insulin pump and can't/won't/shouldn't get in the x-ray box?
___________________________________________________
So the metal detector and wand pick up only metallic threats? What about the non-metallic threats? Do we just hope they magically appear? Did you know the millimeter wave technology is produced through radio waves? Radio waves less radiation then your cell phone you put to your ear and probably close to your insulin pump! You need to become more informed in order to make a sensible argument. Your one sided approach is simply comical and does nothing to promote change.

Anonymous said...

RE: To sum up.... Security check points staffed by private companies who hire professionals who work under the set of rules and standards created by the TSA. Walk Through Metal Detectors combined with the random 'step aside please' swabbing for explosives trace.
___________________________________________
So the same rules and standards, just privatized, awesome that is some tremendous change! Random checks only no risk-based checks? Sounds like we are opening ourselves up for some incredible change here!

Anonymous said...

RE: And this last one is my personal request but it would be great if the security staff would have names badges that easy to read and a clearly defined process of who to talk to, when, and how, for complaints or compliments. Not the current system where Agents obscure their badge, cop an attitude when you ask them their name, and have supervisors who challenge you or intimidate you for asking to speak to a superior. IN short, the current lot are thoroughly unprofessional in their actions and attitudes. Not all of them, I am sure, but to date every single one that I have spoken with.
________________________________________________
So the name badge should have their name? Every airport I have been to they have name badges?? But having the badge display a clearly defined process of who to talk to That Would Be A LARGE BADGE! Well maybe some are unprofessional, but surely not all you have approached?? Have you been to every one of the 451 federalized airports?? But privatizing the screening will help you never encounter another bad apple, and give you the same screening to complain about?? Really man you need to go back to the drawing board on this.

Anonymous said...

RE: One Marine Wounded Warrior brutalized by TSA Screeners

_______________________________


Posting unsubstantiated information perpetuates exaggerated half truths.
____________________________________________________
RE: TSA posted unsubstantiated claims about the Marines screening. Not one shred of verifiable proof and we are expected to take that post as gospel?
__________________________________________________
I do not know about one shred, I can go to countless websites and find videos of the Marines screening? Did you see him take his prosthetic off? I cannot find a single video of him removing the prosthesis? Did he make the complaint, because I only see the complaint being lodged by his traveling companions? Oh but then picked up by the Conservative agenda and propagandized. Until this man officially lodges a complaint or comes out about his mistreatment why should I believe anybody on either side? Thus your information is unsubstantiated!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Granted maybe some are allowed to resign

Thank you for agreeing with me.

but I have read articles where countless others are fired.

Yes, "countless" TSA screeners are guilty of crimes. Again, thanks for agreeing with me.

So him meaning only one, or them? Your wordplays are highly comedic! Figured I would wordplay myself.

I said "him". Singular pronoun, referring to a male.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
So you continue vilifying a whole organization for a small percentage of an agency?

What percentage of airline passengers are terrorists? 0%. So why does the TSA exist. If 400 screeners fired for theft isn't anough to 'vilify' the TSA, then why are ZERO terrorists out of Millions of flyers enough to 'vilify' the passengers and keep the TSA in business??

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
>>http://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/images/backscatter_large.jpg
___________________________________
That is explicit to you? I do not see a thing in that image I find explicit?

Then you must be nearsighted. The persons genitals are clearly visible.

Besides does TSA still use these machines?


Yes. They are (supposedly) phasing out the Backscatter x-ray machines and moving to Millimeter wave machines. However, I find it hard to trust their word on this, as they have been caught outright lying several times before. For instance, they maintained for YEARS that the scanners "could not" save images... until someone found and posted online their specifications for the machines, which specifically require them to be able to save scans. then they lied by posting deliberately lo-res images of the scans (wait- if the machines "could not" save scans, how'd they get the images to post??). Etc.

Last I read officers do not view non explicit images anymore

I think you mean "do not view explicit images". This is supposedly true... for certain types of machines, in certain airports. Of course, they have lied before....

TSM said...

Re: "Allowed to resign" vs "Being Fired".
As you are all aware, the TSA is a govt beurocracy. In addition, various states have differing laws governing terminations, unemployment, etc. In MANY cases, it is simply easier and quicker to get rid of a person by "allowing" them to resign. In many instances, a state will begin paying a termninated employee unem,ployment compensation regardless of the reason they were terminated. The business has to go to an appeals court and make a case while the employee is collecting unemployment, can get a lawyer, etc. All of this costs the business or in this case, the TSA, money.If an employee resigns, done deal. He's out and no compensation is paid and no legal battle, lawyer fees, etc.
Additionally, many cases, while they seem cut and dry, do require extensive amts of investigation and paperwork before an employee can be terminated. Often, the employee is put on paid leave while all the p-work is processing for removal. Again, much easier to allow the employee to resign with the knowledge that resigning is not a "black mark" on future resumes. At least you get him out of the system sooner and less expensively.
So please, consider "Why" someone may be allowed to resign as opposed to being fired.

Anonymous said...

"So again you use the term groping when you said yourself that you do not know if you would call it groping? So you do believe the issue starts with Congress and not TSA? All TSA employees make the rules that go into the security system? So you vilify a whole cadre of officers because they are instructed to perform searches you deem irreprehensible? Seems as though your priorities are out of whack and you need to go to the correct source to solve your issues? I enjoy spirited debate, but please man at least make it somewhat factual!"
**********************************
I will offer some proof that you can confirm for yourself. I suggest that since you DO NOT believe a TSA "pat-down" can be considered groping that you try a "pat-down" in your neighborhood on a stranger and then wait patiently to see what happens to you. I am confident that the "truth" and the "facts" will be revealed to you VERY QUICKLY. Good Luck!

RB said...

But you did not mention many are fired and do not resign? So you continue vilifying a whole organization for a small percentage of an agency? How did I prove your point, please explain?
100’s upon thousands of TSA officers have been hired with TSA and you select a small percentage to vilify; claiming then that the actions of a few represent an entire organizational mindset? How did you make that leap? How will privatization be any better? Will it stop thievery? You have proved my point!


March 26, 2013 at 10:30 AM
....................

Let us just assume for the moment that only a few TSA employees are criminal. How do travelers know which ones to trust? Easy answer is we don't so we must treat all TSA employees as potential criminals.

Like this former TSA employee:

http://culvercity.patch.com/articles/ex-tsa-agent-sentenced-in-pot-smuggling-scheme

"Ex TSA Agent Sentenced in Pot Smuggling Scheme"

"An ex-Transportation Security Administration agent was sentenced Monday to two years in prison for her role in a scheme to smuggle marijuana on flights out of Los Angeles International Airport."

What if it had not been drugs but explosives? There is no excuse to not screen TSA employees just as much as the public.

Again how can we trust any TSA employee when 100's have been caught in all manner of illegal activites? The only safe answer is to realize that the chances for any one TSA employee to be some type of criminal is very high so don't trust none of them.

If you happen to be an honest TSA employee then you can thank the criminals among you and also the other TSA employees who "See Something but Don't Say Something"!

Anonymous said...

"Those of us who speak out against the TSA want the charade of TSA making us safe to be stopped. We want the TSA removed from the actual screening process because the Government doing the screening is a violation of our individual Constitutional Rights. Private companies can do as good or better a job of screening passengers."

Hmm really? How soon everyone forgets... It was Private security that failed on Sept 11 2001, TSA DIDNT EXIST. Oh by the way, all of you qouting the 4th Amendment, need to look up the term ADMINISTRATIVE SEARCH within the 4th Amendment. This is what ALL agencies governmental and civilian utilize when it is determined that a Treat exists to transportation. As long as we have people threating our infrastructure we will have administrative search. Look it up and get over it people, this is the world we live in.

Anonymous said...

As an insulin pump user, I'm not asking to bypass security. I'm perfectly willing to go through the metal detector and have my pump swabbed for explosive residue. Instead, I'm forced to receive a full body patdown. By the way, the TSA never verifies that it actually is an insulin pump. They just use their explosive testing swabs, which are also prone to false positives. They've never actually found a bomb with them. The swabs seem to falsely alarm on lotion and hand soap.

I don't think the government should be touching people's genitals without significant probable cause. Getting on a plane or wearing an insulin pump is not probable cause. If I got a random full body patdown, I would be ok with that. I'm not ok with getting a full body patdown every time I fly.

SSSS for some reason said...

"Anonymous said... Violation of your individual Constitutional Rights, how? The 9th Circuit Court of the United States ruled on this in 1973! Please become informed before making baseless statements!"

Like I said, you are the new guy to this discussion, let me continue to bring you up to speed....

The 9th Circuit Court ruled on Administrative Searches in airports (and DUI check points) are legal as long as they are the least intrusive of all possible options. At the time of the ruling the Walk-Through-Metal Detectors and baggage X-ray machines were the issue. The court agreed that the 'search' was minimally invasive because, to put it in the fewest possible words, all you have to do is walk through. No metal, no delay.

The 9th Circuit ruling did not include AIT or WBI, "comprehensive pat-downs" for refusing AIT or WBI, ID Checkers, and certainly did not include all of those things being provided directly by the Government via the TSA and their Hobsian choice of Submit or Don't Fly.

There are currently two law suits working their way through the system addressing the TSA method of security. No telling how they will go and who will win, and regardless of the decision it will be appealed bringing it one step closer to the Supreme Court where we will finally get an answer as to the Constitutionality of what the TSA does. Until then all of us are just running in circles trying to convince each other the TSA is the best thing or worst thing ever.

Anonymous said...

Nobody may know how many are testing the system. After all isn’t it common knowledge the 9-11 hijackers tested the system for 10 years before they struck?


_________________________________________________

RE: And nobody knows how many TSA personnel steal, or for that matter how many might be testing the system.....
_______________________________________________
Okay then how would your answer of privatization solve this please explain? Nobody in a privatized system will steal, or test the system. Your retorts seem to be short on "proof" and long on biased opinion. I suggest you follow your own advice before you are so quick to vilify all of the TSA!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous‬ said...
Again one person’s actions should never vilify the integrity and class of countless officers!


___________________________________________________
RE: And yet the TSA uses one person's actions to vilify the integrity of countless passengers.
__________________________________________________
One person is trying to take down an American system? That would be awesome if the one person was known so the screening system could be less intensified! Integrity of countless passengers is vilified because they are screened in accordance with the latest threat assessments?

Anonymous said...

" but I have read articles where countless others are fired."
___________________________________________________


See the problem here? 

How many TSA screeners have to be fired or even allowed to resign before TSA takes some action and actually start vetting its prospective employees better and start to monitoring screeners conduct while working a checkpoint?

What TSA is doing today ain't working!
__________________________________________________
So when a background check comes up clean the TSA should somehow know the individual will begin to steal? You have a few who snuck through the cracks in the American system, but the rest had no prior criminal record? So your privatized system will eliminate a person who may steal from ever being hired? WOW you posters need to go back to the drawing board!

RB said...

This is what happens when a highly trained TSA security expert gets ahold of something dangerous.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2299979/Six-hospitalised-TSA-agent-playing-pepper-sprays-colleagues-JFK.html

"Six hospitalised after TSA agent ‘playing around’ pepper sprays colleagues at JFK"


"An airport security worker who discovered a container of pepper spray at JFK sprayed five of his colleagues with the chemical as he was 'playing around' with the canister."



Anonymous said...

If TSA security is as good as TSA background checks then we are all in deep dodo.
____________________________________________________
So say a privatized approach happens do they follow the same rules provided the TSA? YES!!! So if a privatized system happens that will eliminate all mistakes? NO!! So the scrutinizing of the TSA system comes because it is Government, no private entity will make these mistakes?? And no other government agency makes mistakes?

Anonymous said...

RE: Those procedures that were put in place after Mr. Underwear Bomber are not working (see http://blog.tsa.gov/2013/03/clarification-on-covert-testing-at.html). Not that Mr. Underwear Bomber was a viable threat to begin with...
____________________________________________
How are they not working are you some sort of security expert to know this? Would you like TSA to train officers on only findable objects? I would rather have TSA make tests harder than the original. Was this test the same, harder, easier, do you know the parameters of the test? Underwear bomber was not a viable threat? WOW does it take only an explosion and the aftermath to make something a viable threat? I for one am thankful the item never went off, and now the threat is exposed.

Anonymous said...


At some point, security procedures become overly invasive and provide no value. Does it matter to you if there is no reasonable basis (i.e., probable cause) for searching the passenger to that extent?
_____________________________________________
So we have security expert in our midst! This person has decided they know the current searches provide no value. Your credentials come from your bias and what you think is invasive. The second something happens your are the first to say the not enough was done!

Anonymous said...

So him meaning only one, or them? Your wordplays are highly comedic!
Figured I would wordplay myself.


_________________________________________________________
I said "him". Singular pronoun, referring to a male.
_________________________________________________
Well thank you for agreeing with me that not all TSA agents who are caught for criminal activity resign!

You said " Difference is, those companies will FIRE a worker that steals from their customers. The TSA 'allows him to resign'.

A private company with the same rules as TSA will never have an employee caught for theft? Private screeners will never steal anything? The TSA does not hold these individuals accountable for their actions? By all you posts it appears otherwise?

Anonymous said...

So you continue vilifying a whole organization for a small percentage of an agency?


___________________________________________________
What percentage of airline passengers are terrorists? 0%. So why does the TSA exist. If 400 screeners fired for theft isn't anough to 'vilify' the TSA, then why are ZERO terrorists out of Millions of flyers enough to 'vilify' the passengers and keep the TSA in business??
______________________________________________
How many TSA employees are employed? 47,000/46,600 = 1% so vilifying another 99% is justified? 0% of airlines passengers are terrorists? You know this number how? Again, how long did the 9-11 hijackers train and test the system?

Anonymous said...

I think you mean "do not view explicit images". This is supposedly true... for certain types of machines, in certain airports. Of course, they have lied before...
_______________________________________________
And you find it explicit? And some more conspiracy theories have been provided. But when it is privatized these machines will go away? Well I like this blogs train of thinking vilify the officers who do not make the rules and replace them with private screeners who have to follow the same rules. LMAO

Anonymous said...

I will offer some proof that you can confirm for yourself. I suggest that since you DO NOT believe a TSA "pat-down" can be considered groping that you try a "pat-down" in your neighborhood on a stranger and then wait patiently to see what happens to you. I am confident that the "truth" and the "facts" will be revealed to you VERY QUICKLY. Good Luck!
________________________________________
So I should simply without TSA training conduct a TSA pat down? On somebody in my neighborhood who is not flying? What purpose would I conduct a pat-down for? Everybody who goes through the airport gets a pat-down? I thought the pat down was only conducted when an individual ops out of the machinery, alarms, or raises suspicion? I hope the pat-down is a effective as the machinery! Or just let the person opt out of the machinery and have a less effective pat down? I am no security expert, but you make no sense!

Anonymous said...

Let us just assume for the moment that only a few TSA employees are criminal. How do travelers know which ones to trust? Easy answer is we don't so we must treat all TSA employees as potential criminals.
_________________________________________________
So when a system changes (privatization) it will be fully trustable? All employees hired, you will know they never will steal a thing? Wow, because an employee from an organization steals all members are criminals? You have a good way of looking at things!

Anonymous said...

Again how can we trust any TSA employee when 100's have been caught in all manner of illegal activites? The only safe answer is to realize that the chances for any one TSA employee to be some type of criminal is very high so don't trust none of them.
________________________________________________
So what is the percentage on TSA bad employees to good? 47000/46400 = 1%. So 99% have never been charged with criminal activity? Seems to me you better not leave your home if you play those odds?

Anonymous said...

Today I read that 6 people were injured at JFK airport after a TSA agent sprayed his co-workers with pepper spray for "fun." I know...I know...more training.

It seems that your week in review never covers all events.

Anonymous said...

Something else for next weeks 'Week in Review':

http://now.msn.com/chris-yves-dabel-tsa-agent-pepper-sprays-co-workers
"TSA agent 'plays around' with pepper spray, shoots other screeners"
"Chris Yves Dabel found a canister of pepper spray on the floor in Terminal 2 and, according to other agents, believed it was a laser pointer. "[Dabel and other agents] were playing around with it," an airport official said. Dabel eventually figured out how to aim the aerosol can and accidentally shot five TSA agents with pepper spray, an idiotic incident that sent all of them to the hospital."

Yup, thank goodness for them highly trained screeners keeping us safe.

@SkyWayManAz said...

tramky said...
"And not a peep about the incident that should raise EVERYONE's hairs on the back of their neck: the impersonator who got into the cockpit of an airliner after passing through all airport security.

So much for TSA security, so much for cockpit doors. And this guy was discovered, once again, by flight crew, NOT by airport security or their procedures. IN THE COCKPIT, IN A SEAT IN THE COCKPIT!"

TSA doesn't clear passengers to ride in the jump seat. That decision is up to the airline and involves verification. The individual in this case had a boarding pass for economy so TSA would not have stopped him if he showed that and his passport to the document checker. It appears this individual got caught when he tried to jump seat without the proper paperwork. The flight crew was probably diplomatic and courteous assuming the verification paperwork would come down the jetway before they backed off the gate. The scandal would have been if the flight crew fell for his act and took off with him in the jump seat. That didn't happen because they weren't going to merely take his word for it. Law enforcement handled it properly.

TSORon said...

RB Said…
[[Let us just assume for the moment that only a few TSA employees are criminal. How do travelers know which ones to trust? Easy answer is we don't so we must treat all TSA employees as potential criminals.]]

Your right RB, that is the easy answer. And history shows that the “easy answer” is rarely the right answer or the best answer. Every government, industry, company, shop, or other business has its share of unscrupulous employee’s, TSA is no different in this. But unlike most business’, industries, companies or shops, TSA performs an extensive pre-employment background check on applicants. Most others that I mentioned do not or cannot.

But if we use your “logic” then we should trust no one under any circumstance. Not even businesses we have patronized before and had no issues with. That’s a very cold and dark world you paint for the rest of us RB, I’m glad I’m not you.

Anonymous said...

TSORon said...
RB Said…
[[Let us just assume for the moment that only a few TSA employees are criminal. How do travelers know which ones to trust? Easy answer is we don't so we must treat all TSA employees as potential criminals.]]

Your right RB, that is the easy answer. And history shows that the “easy answer” is rarely the right answer or the best answer.


And yet, the TSA treats all passengers as potential terrorists.

Hmm.

Anonymous said...

One trend I have noticed a lot here...
If the media says it, it's gospil.

If TSA responds, its made up.

Really?

A guy gets into the cockpit of a plane, even though he had valid ID and a valid bording pass, somehow it is still TSA's fault.

A Marine is screened by two long time military vets and the media says he had to remove his legs. The Marine doesnt say that, the TSA video does not support that, but sopmehow since the media says so, it must be true.

Get a grip people. Stop your cry baby whinning, take a bus or a train. I want to fly safe. No planes have been over taken since the enception of TSA. I know TSA could be better, buut I support their efforts in spite of the imperfections.

Wintermute said...

Anonymous said...

"So when a background check comes up clean the TSA should somehow know the individual will begin to steal?"

Problem: TSA has a habit of putting screeners to work without a completed background check.

Anonymous also said...

"How are they not working are you some sort of security expert to know this?"

Actually, since you ask, yes, I am. But it doesn't take a security expert to know this.

TSORon said...

"TSA performs an extensive pre-employment background check on applicants."

Except when they're don't because they're too backlogged to bother.

Then TSORon said...

"But if we use your “logic” then we should trust no one under any circumstance. Not even businesses we have patronized before and had no issues with. That’s a very cold and dark world you paint for the rest of us RB, I’m glad I’m not you."

I believe the logic you are following is TSA's own logic, which RB is just using as a "good for the goose is good for the gander" type of thing... See, the TSA treats all passengers as potential terrorists, despite the fact there are fewer passenger-terrorists than there are TSA-thieves. So, using the TSAs logic, then if all passengers are potential terrorists, then all TSAgents must be potential thieves. But you knew that's what RB meant, I'm sure, and just wanted to use it as an opportunity to be condescending.

Anonymous said...

I believe the logic you are following is TSA's own logic, which RB is just using as a "good for the goose is good for the gander" type of thing... See, the TSA treats all passengers as potential terrorists, despite the fact there are fewer passenger-terrorists than there are TSA-thieves. So, using the TSAs logic, then if all passengers are potential terrorists, then all TSAgents must be potential thieves. But you knew that's what RB meant, I'm sure, and just wanted to use it as an opportunity to be condescending.
_______________________________
TSA treat all potential passengers as terrorists? The only individuals that receive any sort of pat-down include who? Do all passengers receive a pat-down? No just the passengers that alarm, opt-out of technology, or arouse suspicion correct. If I opt – out should my screening not be comparable to the machine Mr. Security expert?
Condescending, you posters are just angry your unsubstantial comments are being given credible answers. I enjoy the twisting of words, maybe if you just spoke the truth on any matter more credibility could be given?

Wintermute said...

Anonymous said...

"Get a grip people. Stop your cry baby whinning,"

Nice insults... Which violate posting guidelines, BTW...

"take a bus or a train. I want to fly safe."

Except TSA is there, too... And that mode of transportation is less safe than flying (even if you took away the security theater)... And that theater makes you LESS safe, even though your emotional response is to FEEL safer.

"No planes have been over taken since the enception of TSA."

I've not been attacked by a tiger since getting this anti-tiger rock.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
How many TSA employees are employed? 47,000/46,600 = 1% so vilifying another 99% is justified?

It is indicative of a major issue that needs to be addressed, YES. The TSA, as a whole, is NOT addressing it. Thus, the TSA as a whole is bad.

0% of airlines passengers are terrorists? You know this number how?

Because none have been caught by the TSA? Ever? And hundreds of millions of people have flown. So, Letsee... '0' into 'hundreds of Millions'... carry the two... = 0% terrorists.

I'll put it simply for you:

1% bad TSA is > 0% terrorist passengers.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous (but probably a TSA screener) said:
Charade and how do you know it is not making us safe??...You are making baseless claims!

I have this magic rock that keeps tigers away....

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said:
So the name badge should have their name? Every airport I have been to they have name badges??

You aren't very well read up on the TSA, are you??

http://www.infowars.com/journalist-tsa-agents-are-wearing-badges-upside-down-to-stay-anonymous/
"A prominent talk radio host and author who has had previous run ins with the TSA noted Sunday that many TSA agents are wearing their identification badges upside down, making it more difficult for travelers and anyone attempting to film the agents to identify them..."

Indeed, the very post you replied to says "...Agents obscure their badge...".

Even this very blog as addressed this issue:
http://blog.tsa.gov/2012/11/here-we-go-again-amy-alkon.html
"Many officers choose to wear their SIDA badges so their full name is not visible.... This is permissible." - blogger bob.

Perhaps it is YOU who "need to go back to the drawing board on this". "LOL"

Leon said...

Anonymous said: "So we have security expert in our midst! This person has decided they know the current searches provide no value. Your credentials come from your bias and what you think is invasive. The second something happens your are the first to say the not enough was done!"

You incessantly demand proof from other posters, yet you make all of the above claims with no proof at all and no interest in accuracy. Your posts add no value to this conversation. Some would call you a troll.

Screenshot taken--because I am allowed to question another poster's veracity in public if they are allowed to question mine!

Wintermute said...

Anonymous said...
"If I opt – out should my screening not be comparable to the machine Mr. Security expert?"

Your search should be a Constitutionally-allowed administrative search. Neither the scanners nor pat-downs qualify. So neither should be required (and both are easy to get past)

"Condescending, you posters are just angry your unsubstantial comments are being given credible answers. "

First, yes, condescending. See your "Mr. Security Expert" snipe. Second, show me a credible answer.

"I enjoy the twisting of words, maybe if you just spoke the truth on any matter more credibility could be given?"

Have I ever twisted words on here? (hint, the answer is "no.")

Wintermute said...

Anonymous said...

"A guy gets into the cockpit of a plane, even though he had valid ID and a valid bording pass, somehow it is still TSA's fault."

Yes, and here's why. BDO's. The TSA claims this particular layer of security should stop this type of thing from happening.

TSORon said...

Anonymous said…
[[It is indicative of a major issue that needs to be addressed, YES. The TSA, as a whole, is NOT addressing it. Thus, the TSA as a whole is bad.]]

Gee anon, then since every company, agency, or other group also suffer from that same 1% or more then they are ALL BAD, right? Please lock your doors and never leave the house again.

Anonymous continues…
[[Because none have been caught by the TSA? Ever? And hundreds of millions of people have flown. So, Letsee... '0' into 'hundreds of Millions'... carry the two... = 0% terrorists.]]

Interesting supposition that is totally devoid of any facts. Must be a really comfortable arm chair!

And Anonymous ended with…
[[I'll put it simply for you:

1% bad TSA is > 0% terrorist passengers.]]

Given this I have to assume that you are not in the business. No rational security professional would make such a comment. Try using Websters (http://www.merriam-webster.com/) and looking up the word “Deterrence”.

Wintermute said...

TSORon, just because you are a TSO, this does NOT make you a security expert. It also does not give you the right to be condescending. However, your comments on this blog DO highlight part of the problem with the TSA.

Alsop, correlation != causation. The TSA has done nothing to.deter terrorists.