|
Post by liriodendron on May 11, 2012 17:19:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by liriodendron on May 11, 2012 17:21:29 GMT -5
I was very pleased on our return trip from Atlanta this past week that the TSA guy motioned me to go through the metal detector (while my husband and son were sent for the full body scans and then given a quick pat down on top of it). I must look honest. ;D
|
|
|
Post by doctork on May 12, 2012 15:51:09 GMT -5
You were lucky lirio! However, the distribution is either random, or whatever they need to do to keep the lines shorter.
Plus they usually pick on "Hot looking" teens and 20-something women or little old ladies who look like they won't put up a fight. So there's a compliment - you do not look old and you don't look like the fighting kind!
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jul 31, 2012 21:15:27 GMT -5
I'm back from Europe with another tale of TSA stupidity wasting their own resources (= tax dollars) and travelers' time.
My return to Boston was via a flight from Paris (Charles DeGaulle Airport) to Philadelphia, followed by a connecting flight to Boston. At CDG the TSA screened all passengers identically (as far as I could tell) to the screening they perform in American airports. (I happened to get randomly selected by the computer for further screening, in the form of an agent rummaging through my carry on luggage just as I was to board the plane.) When we got to Philadelphia, we passed through Immigration and Customs and collected our checked luggage and sent on to our further destinations. Through all of this, there was no opportunity for us to leave the secured area or have contact with anyone outside. But before we could proceed to our connecting flights we were all given another, totally pointless, full screening.
Another stupidity, not so shocking, but thoroughly ridiculous, is the announcement made on all flights that "because of heightened security" passengers are not allowed to use the restrooms outside their own class — "economy" passengers may not use first class restroom, and vice versa. Are they so stupid that they really think there is some genuine security concern about which restroom a fully screened passenger uses? Or do we think we are so stupid that we will actually believe this nonsense?
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jul 31, 2012 23:30:26 GMT -5
I'm glad you are back safe and sound, and I hope you had a fabulous trip! I am sure pictures will follow, right? And all the details too, including an update on Malcolm Miller.
As a rule, foreign airports with flights departing to the US are required to do the same screening as TSA for US-bound flights, though usually the agents are more polite and professional than our domestic TS"O"s.
The multiple pointless screenings are so that the employee count and budget dollars are kept high, since that is how they keep score inside the Beltway. If anyone stopped to think about it, it should raise serious alarm - how much are they missing with the first screening that they have to keep doing more and more of them?
The majority of American flyers are of the "anything for security" mindset and are also inclined to think the apparatus looks impressive - like TSA might be really doing something to ensure security. Experienced flyers and thoughtful people do notice that it is "Security Theater" designed to look good, though it actually does nothing.
I suppose there are some people who believe the story line.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Aug 1, 2012 3:34:45 GMT -5
I'm on call, can't sleep. so I troll the internet for the latest TSA antics, which are not hard to find.
However, this isn't really TSA antics, but a rather amusing discussion on whether a passenger can bring live crustaceans (crabs or lobsters) on board the aircraft as carry-on. Now I know the answer to that, at least if flying out of Portland, Maine - you buy them packed for air travel and march right on with all the other lobster-carrying pax.
But, if you don't know that, it's an honest question:
//So the question is, is there a reason I cannot bring a few live crab or lobsters in my carry on?//
Answers:
If you have a problem, you could say that they are your Emotional Support Crustaceans.
Just print fake boarding passes for them. They've already got their shoes off.
I once saw this on an episode of Airline. At least on Southwest, live lobsters were considered live animals, i.e. they couldn't be brought aboard unless they were in an appropriate crate.
I think crates are inhumane. If you are going to be the guardian of a crab you have to be prepared to socialize it properly.
How will it ever learn if it can't be out in public?
You need to start with a leash, then proceed to voice control alone.
I say dress 'em all in little bitty tuxes and tell the Checkpoint guards that these crabs happen to be UPPER crust-aceans...
Is each crab entitled to 3 ounces of melted butter?
TSA dude: "Sorry, you might try to claw your way into the cockpit. Banned. Since you can't take your crabs/lobsters, mind leaving your butter so the screeners can examine both together in the break room?"
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Aug 1, 2012 8:15:01 GMT -5
Socializing crabs ... Leno or Jon Stewart could get some double-meaning mileage out of that.
Can't sleep? the latest trick I read is to eat lettuce. I was looking for things to do with lettuce that don't involve hot bacon grease and learned that lettuce sandwiches can be soporific. Of course, lettuce contains a lot of water, so if you consume a thick lettuce sandwich before bed, you might be getting up for other reasons.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Aug 1, 2012 9:20:04 GMT -5
I didn't put in the entire commentary, but the Leno comments were there. One of them: There is a shampoo for that!
It's not that I have insomnia, it's that the phone will ring with calls from the hospital or Emergency Room at irregular intervals, guaranteed to occur right after I fall asleep. Often I will have to get dressed and hurry over to the hospital. So it is just not a good night's sleep.
|
|
|
Post by booklady on Oct 24, 2012 13:59:35 GMT -5
Kristin, I thought of you Saturday as I went through security at Logan Airport. I put my feet in the shoe images, stood with my arms stretched up for the required 3 seconds, and then headed over to the waiting TSA agent, who said, "ok, hold out your right arm." So I did. And was waved on. The guy behind me was told to, "hold out your left arm."
Weird!
There was nothing on my right arm or wrist, though there is a ring on my right ring finger. In retrospect, maybe that ring set off some sort of alert that they were following up on, and maybe the guy behind me had a ring on his left hand. Who knows!!
|
|
|
Post by booklady on Oct 24, 2012 14:00:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jan 18, 2013 15:21:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jan 18, 2013 22:37:48 GMT -5
It's probably a victory for safety, as the MMW (milimeter wave) technology uses radio waves (somewhat similar to cellphones) instead of ionizing radiation to create the nude picture; no exposure to a known carcinogen. Then the nude picture is converted by a software package to a "gumby"-like image at the checkpoint with a colored circle on the suspicious area; allegedly no visible nude pictures so no privacy violation. Sometimes the TS"O" will then pat down only the suspicious area instead of your whole body, thus omitting the breast squeeze and genital karate chop. However, depending on the airport, there is a rather high false positive rate of 25% - 50+%, meaning that a pat down is often needed anyway despite having the scan.
Two caveats IMHO:
1) There is no proof that MMW is "safe." Despite the repeated studies disproving a causal link between cellphones and brain tumors, several Scandinavian studies have shown a (not statistically significant) trend toward increased brain tumor risk among cellphone-using children, whose young brains are especially susceptible.
2) The TSA has not admitted that the backscatter X-ray machines are dangerous, which I think is the real reason they are being removed from airports, in addition to the PR and privacy issue; instead they are blaming the vendor for not timely creating the software. I think we will be seeing an increase in exposure-related cancers in the future as a result of this reckless and unethical experiment.
I will not go through either scanner, as I believe it is an unreasonable search in violation of our 4th amendment rights; the federal government has no business requiring nude photos of every air passenger, absent reasonable suspicion.
Full disclosure: I was an early adopter of cellphones, and I had a brain tumor right next to my cellphone ear. I use my cellphone very sparingly and I am not volunteering for ANY extra radiation, ionizing or not. That is my bias and I am sticking to it.
|
|
|
Post by BoatBabe on Jan 19, 2013 12:46:52 GMT -5
Sounds like a reasonable bias for you to have, Doc.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Mar 21, 2013 1:57:41 GMT -5
I had an odd experience on this trip - I did not get even close to being arrested or sent to Gitmo. Of course that is not the odd thing.
What happened was I did not get screened or searched AT ALL. No nude-o-scope, no metal detector. I got to the X-ray loading station, placed my possessions on the loader and informed the clerk that I medically cannot do the body scanner. He then demanded to know the exact nature of my disability (an illegal question of course) and yelled at me for sending my possessions through X-ray already, saying I was supposed to keep them with me, which is not true - they should be sent through X-ray.
Nonetheless, they had already gone through, so I watched them with an eagle eye until I was directed to walk over to my bags (don't touch them though!!) until my designated groper directed me to the groping station. The "female assist" (aka groper) was busy groping some toddler twins, making mom remove theri shoes, and inspecting diaper contents! I waited by my backpack, carry-on bag and laptop though I considered just grabbing them and walking. That could result n a terminal dump though - major inconvenience for all the others in the terminal.
After a few minutes of fondling the toddler twins, Groper comes over to me and says "What are you waiting for? Get going and get out of our way!"
I saw no need to argue - I proceeded to the gate ASAP.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Mar 21, 2013 8:59:31 GMT -5
I have never met the kind of jerks you seem to come across so often in airport screening. I'm wondering if the sequestration cuts are making people more frazzled. Just saw a post from a friend trying to get home from a vacation in Latin America. They're stuck in Houston because the immigration lines went from 5 of 35 open to 2 of 35 - making tons of people miss their connections. So Congress is making money for hotels and restaurants near airports.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Mar 21, 2013 9:42:05 GMT -5
I didn't think they were jerks; after all, I got through the line up fairly quickly with only X-ray of my belongings. No groping for refusing the nude-o-scope, which by the way was MMW not X-ray backscatter. TSA is getting rid of the backscatter, as I believe they have realized it is a bad idea to X-ray every traveler.
I do think they should have made me go through the metal detector though, as I do believe strongly in appropriate security - X-ray carry-ons, WTMD for pax. But the woman was so busy scrutinizing those toddler twins that I was not properly checked; I think she just forgot me. The twins and their mother were screened properly by WTMD, and were not made to go through MMW, which is appropriate.
There was another mother who had a little baby wrapped in a blanket because it was cold - they did allow mom and bay to go through the WTMD, but the baby had to have the blanket removed so s/he was crying from the cold. Well, at least it was a brief exposure, and who knows, she could have been wrapped in explosives under the blanket. Happens all the time, right? That TSO was polite and apologetic to the mom and baby.
The moat dragon checking ID's was very pleasant, chatting amiably with pax, and she was very efficient, much faster than the 5 or 6 people who were screening pax at X-ray + MMW (the body scanning takes three times longer than WTMD and requires more employees). I think that because TSA often employs such marginal and apparently untrainable employees, those who can't get a better job elsewhere, they get a lot of rude people who lack "home training." So I am never surprised by rudeness and and stupidity. There is no job requirement for intelligence and good manners, so they are rare at the check point.
The longer lines are just political show IMHO. Federal employees must e given a 30 day notice of any furlough, so there is no real reason to have fewer workers on the lines until March 30. And agencies could choose to furlough their excess managers, buy fewer $700 hammers, or hand out fewer lucrative cost-plus contracts for optional projects. They could have fewer luxury dinner gatherings to "honor" various dignitaries in Washington, DC. (Our daughter the reporter says all that continue as usual).
Those efforts would not be seen by the public and thus would not persuade us that the government MUST have more of our money and still more employees in their fiefdoms. So cuts are made in the areas that affect and/or inconvenience us - we can't tour the White House, we have to wait longer at customs and immigration and at airport security.
BTW I smiled and thanked the moat dragon, and wished her a good day. She deserved it. It is not her fault that ID checking is silly, but she was doing her job well and was interacting pleasantly with the traveling public.
I had no trouble on the outbound legs - FLG is much better that PHX or CLT, as it is a smaller airport with friendlier employees at TSA.
|
|
|
Post by Jane on Mar 21, 2013 12:11:10 GMT -5
I'm flying out of GR tomorrow morning. Usually they are pretty relaxed there--it's a small airport.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Mar 21, 2013 19:11:34 GMT -5
I'm flying out of GR tomorrow morning. Usually they are pretty relaxed there--it's a small airport. That is my experience as well - the smaller airports are friendlier and more relaxed. They are also less likely to have the nude body scanners which I find offensive. I do read websites where travelers complain that small airports' employees have less to do so that they are more rigid than the larger ones, but I haven't found that to be true
|
|
|
Post by joew on Oct 12, 2013 13:18:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BoatBabe on Oct 12, 2013 14:29:39 GMT -5
Very Interesting, Joe. The events seem to be so comical, unless of course, they could be real. I'll bet Doc has something to say on this.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Oct 12, 2013 19:33:19 GMT -5
I think US Airways and United employees are especially paranoid about reporting and the "See something, Say Something," and these efforts are usually addressed to people who guilty of FWB (Flying While Brown). I don't see any way to use the lav other than either a "hard left" or "hard right," depending on which side you use. If seated on the aisle, I often stand up to let the middle/window seat pax get up to use the lav, or to retrieve items from the overhead bin during the flight, or to walk around to stretch my legs and avoid a pulmonary embolus. If I am traveling with friends/family, I might even go over to their seats to check in with them. I have observed other pax walk up front to use the first class lav because coach lavs are full, not because they wish to attack the cockpit. That seems to be the "suspicious activities" discussed in the report. Was this a "dry run"? I don't know, but I am doubtful. I suspect it's part of the campaign to "Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid" and could even have been staged by DHS/TSA to prove how "essential" they are, given the government shutdown. And 9/11 is always an opportunity for scare mongering. Or launching symbolic attacks - Ben Ghazi. Or other terrorism such as Columbine, Sandy Hook, or Aurora for that matter. I believe, and sincerely hope, that the government agencies tasked with protecting us are identifying dangerous people, rather than focusing exclusively on dangerous objects or just airplanes. With reinforced cockpits and attitude adjustment, a 9/11 style attack has become impossible. That problem is solved. Blowing up an airplane is dramatic, but if pax are properly screened by the TSA, they are not bringing anything dangerous on board. The crew, the caterers, the ground crew - they are not screened, and are accorded free access to the plane. And I do not think TSA is properly screening all cargo yet.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jan 5, 2014 12:46:37 GMT -5
This is not about TSA, but rather a bigger picture problem, namely that 12 years after 9/11 we still don't know how to fight terrorism (maybe they aren't watching "Homeland" on cable TV). Among other points in the article, the author notes that we have nearly 700 research articles on how to stop bullying and fewer than 90 credible research studies on how to effectively combat terrorists. Not that anti-bullying is unimportant, but gee, so is fighting terrorism. I have signed up for a Coursera course on Fighting Terrorism, which starts later this month, and I am looking forward to it. Meanwhile, here is the WaPo story about anti-terrorism www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/11/twelve-years-after-911-we-still-have-no-idea-how-to-fight-terrorism-2/Now this one is about the TSA, while I am thinking about them. Maybe you didn't see this story last month, but rest easy - the ever efficient TSA has disarmed Rooster Monkburn, the well known terrorist Sock Monkey. Y'all are familiar with sock monkeys, right? I purchased sock monkey wine bottle gift bags this Christmas for wrapping gifts of wine. This Seattle woman in the news story has a small business making sock monkeys, and was trying to smuggle bring Rooster, a sock monkey cowboy complete with toy holster and gun, onto a plane shortly before Christmas. Fortunately an alert screener spotted the "toy" gun - who knows, it looked real, right - confiscated the weapon, and threatened to call the police. www.king5.com/news/local/TSA-agent-confiscates-sock-monkeys-toy-pistol-234986321.htmlI am surprised only that there are not more cartoons about TSA. You can't make this stuff up. The TSA screener may not have been given a purple heart for saving America from destruction but the TSA did make a public announcement that next day, supporting the screener and how she had Done The Right Thing, out of an Abundance of Caution.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jan 5, 2014 20:37:23 GMT -5
In the aftermath of 9/11 there was some talk (I think from the President) about how we should all just continue to live as usual or the terrorists will have won. I realize that airport screening is necessary, but for it to be without an ounce of common sense is appalling.
|
|
|
Post by joew on May 17, 2016 10:54:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by doctork on May 18, 2016 2:26:50 GMT -5
Sadly, everythibg in the linked article is true. At a cost of $10 to $12 billion annually for 15 years, TSA has not caughta single terorist. The weekly "body count" of weapons surrendered at the checkpoint (presumably only 5% of those carried on board) has not detected a single incident of malintent, though children's Star Wars light sabers have been seized by overeager "officers" who do not realize Star Wars is fiction, and a woman's purse with a picture of a gun was also seized, since the TSO could not grasp that picture of gun =/ real weapon.
It's a cheap political budget trick. Neffie (head of TSA, and I am ashamed to say, a Coast Gueardsman) wants long lines so pax complain to Congress members and budgets are increased to "hire more people." He needs to remain another year or two to make enough contracts to land those lucrative cost-plus contracts as a private entrepreneur when he leaves office.
The 'Xray machine" - actually non-ionizing radiation not yet proven to cause cancer, that takes your nude photo - takes 5 TSA people to operate it white the metal detector requires only 3, and has fewer false positives.
The nude photos, belt and she removal are kabuki security theater and do nothing to enhance safety. Everybody who travels knows that except some hysterical fraidy cats who foment fear to get elected.
I applied for Global Entry the enhance WA drivers license so I now avoid most TSA interaction. But beware this summer travel season, security may take 3 hours! No wonder so many drive instead - and die.
|
|
|
Post by Jane on May 19, 2016 8:49:11 GMT -5
We are flying out of GR on May 31 and out of the dreaded O'Hare on June 23. Bill and I both have the get-out-of-jail-free card to pass through the line, but in June I'll be flying with Annie and Henry so it could get ugly. We are told to be there THREE HOURS early. This is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on May 19, 2016 15:14:14 GMT -5
It is ridiculous. I used to make the cut for "drive vs fly" at 300-350 miles, then 500 miles, now it might be quicker to drive 600 - 700 miles. Especially if you need to wait for checked bags and to rent a car once at your destination.
Several airports are considering a switch to non-TSA private contractors, airlines are assigning some of their own employees to help TSA, and airlines are also complaining to the governmental powers-that-be. It is getting very expensive for the airlines to re-accommodate thousands of passengers who stood in the TSA line for hours while their flights left without them.
The arrival at the airport "3 hours before flight time" is now a necessity if you will spend 2+ hours in the security line and must also be in your airline seat 20 minutes before pushback.
With thousands of pax standing in the TSA line they also make a tempting terrorist target - look at what happened recently in Brussells.
Yet spend time observing the security check. There are usually many closed lanes and often PreCheck is closed too (never mind that TSA encouraged you to pay extra to join and get quicker passage), yet there are dozens of idle TS"O"s standing around playing with cellphones or joking around with co-workers instead of opening more lanes to clear backlog. And you will never see a "lead" or "supervisor" (two and three stripers) doing any work on the line to help out either.
As for the "lack of funds" for adequate TSA personnel, remember that the passenger pays a fee of $5.60 each way for security. So more pax already = more revenue to fund more employees. "We don't have enough money to improve service" is a bogus claim.
Yeah that's my usual anti-TSA rant but remember that the FBI and CIA are saddled with antique systems for real lack of $$$. If they could use the $$ TSA wastes, we'd all be safer.
|
|
|
Post by BoatBabe on May 20, 2016 20:25:07 GMT -5
Interesting . . . Very Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jul 1, 2016 0:45:00 GMT -5
Since the publicity about excessively long security lines, applications for Pre-Check have nearly tripled from less than 7,000 to over 16,000 daily. This causes me to wonder if the staffing "shortage" and long lines were just stunts staged to increase PreCheck and budget $$$.
After the airport terrorist slaughters in Brussels and now Istanbul, I would hope security attention and money might be directed to soft airport targets with large crowds and no security - the Thousands Standing Around and the thousands standing in line that are outside the secured area. We really should not let terrorists get to the airport to begin with.
On the positive side, on this last trip to Albany, lines were short and TSA clerks were not rude. Many passengers who are not vetted PreCheck members are being moved to those quicker lines to keep the wait times down. That's a separate issue, but I don't really worry that they haven't shed their shoes and walked through the Nude-O-Scope. Risk of another 9/11 ended that day, with passengers wising up and reinforced cockpit doors.
|
|