Airport Screening

[Pugdog007]

I just returned from my first flight since the Fed's took over security at US airports. BIG difference and personally, I feel safer. Security checkpoints that used to have 3 or 4 "unqualified" persons now have 20+ professional federal employees that all seem to know what they're doing. This was at EVERY security checkpoint I encountered: B'ham, Houston, Dallas.

A move in the right direction IMHO.

On Southwest, if you get the "special" boarding pass with the checkerboard printed at the bottom, Congratulations... you have been chosen for their random search

 

[mcnuss]

I would agree that in those airports where the TSA took over, there is the appearance of better security. Of course, they are not in all the airports yet, and they are having a very difficult time hiring. This is such a difficult issue, isn't it?

 

[4cruisin]

Mcnuss,

I agree that it is a difficult issue especially for the people that seem to be constantly flagged for extra screening. I know that I am not a terrorist. I know that I am absolutely not going to do anything that would cause a problem on the flight. I know that I have not let my luggage out of my sight so that someone could tamper with it, but the security agents don't know any of that.

Even though I do not fit any ethnic profiling, I still understand that the agents have a job to do and if in fact the checks really are random, then so be it.

The basis of my original post was curiosity to see if anyone else had had similar experiences in the past. I guess I just wanted some assurance that it was random and I was not mistakenly on some watch list somewhere.

Now, I'll print a copy of this out so when I go thru my 10th body search at Logan or MCO in January, I'll be able to remind myself not to get upset at the agents and not let it ruin the rest of my trip. lol

 

[taswira]

I think what is most difficult for really <I>frequent</I> flyers like myself (flying 50+ days per year for my work) is if you end up being "selected" for a "random" security check time after time - maybe on every leg of a flight several trips in a row! It does make you question the effectiveness of "random" checks if you are that frequent of a flyer, pale, blonde, blue-eyed, not suspicious looking or acting, valid U.S. passport, even another U.S. government ID, never been arrested, never set off the metal detector, and never have anything the least bit suspicious in carry-on or checked luggage. I fly often enough that many of the gate agents know me. On top of that, I married an Air Force fighter pilot and my entire family are airline people. So sometimes I wonder . . .

Yes - a blue-eyed blonde <I>could</I> be a terrorist. I don't mind a "random" check now and then. Increased security is needed and appreciated. But I, like many others I know, DO have to question the effectiveness of "random" checks.

 

[mrsltg]

I'm not even sure if "random" checks work. My Mom flew a few weeks ago out of NY and was checked. She promptly was told that under no circumstances could her cuticle pusher accompany her in the cabin of the plane, but the 10 nitrous oxide chargers she was carrying (in accompanyment to a whip cream canister ... for a gift) were not even looked at. When she arrived on my side she said that she had checked her bag due to the manicuring kit. She then took out the gift from her carry on bag... I nearly died... I wasn't sure whether I should laugh or cry!

On another flight, this one bound for NY from BWI, the person randomly selected for inspection was the sleeping 2 year old in the arms of the woman in front of me! Talk about terror... wake a sleeping toddler!!!

Maybe random searches as they are aren't the way to go. I agree with Taswira in the "blue-eyed blonde" comment. As far as I can remember, the people responsible for 9-11 definitely fit a certain profile.

Erin

 

[sandee]

On our May 02 cruise, Katie, my niece who is 16 was taken aside where we had our carry on luggage screened and she had to empty her pockets, take off her shoes,etc. even though she hadn't set off the alarm. Later, as we waited to board the plane they chose her again for a more indepth search- even looking through the pages of the book she was carrying. She was so nervous about our return flight that she'd be singled out again that she was physically ill - 16 y.os don't like to feel different I guess. She is a 4th gen. American and an All American girl. I think it was just the luck of the draw that she got singled out twice. Did I mention it was the 1st time she'd ever flown? On the way back they never gave her a second glance. A couple months before our cruise, Her mother had sent for passports for herself and for Katie and Katie's came without a snag. Her mom got a letter asking for further proof of i.d. - like you she sent everything but the kitchen sink. A week later hers arrived along with other proofs of i.d. she'd sent but no letter of explaination on why she'd required extra i.d. This may be a random thing too and you were just the "lucky" person each time.

 

[TxJasmine]

I just have to throw my two cents in about some "blue-eyed blonde" comments that were made. The Middle East has had a long history full of occupation by other countries. France, Greece, Turkey, and other countries have had influences over many of the Middle Eastern countries. Because of this, many of the people there do not fit a certain "profile". There are many blue-eyed blonde Arabs. It's very common in some of the countries, so beware of stereotyping!

I agree that random searches are a hassle, and I believe that the government and the airlines are working on ways to improve the system. But until that happens, random searches are probably still the best security.

 

[taswira]

Originally posted by TxJasmine
I just have to throw my two cents in about some "blue-eyed blonde" comments that were made.

If you re-read my post you will see that I said "<B>Yes - a blue-eyed blonde could be a terrorist.</B> I don't mind a "random" check now and then. "

If you <B>read my entire post</B>, it was everything else about me that makes me not even remotely a terrorist candidate. But I agree - It was part of the "random" security checks. It just seems a shame that people who MUST fly 50+ days per year and have never so much as caused a metal detector beep or carried <I>anything</I> suspicious (even a nail file or nail clippers), and have the "background profile" that I have (as MANY of us do), get selected for such random checks. And as the previous poster noted - Randomly selecting a sleeping 2 year old? If there is suspicion of some sort, yes. But random for an infant or toddler?

Even my airline pilot nephew says the current method of security checks is NOT effective and simply serves to provide a false sense of security. We NEED airport security checks, but we need a better process and a better means of determining who will be checked. This is NOT the fault of any airport security worker. They do what they are trained and told to do. And no - I don't have a solution. More than the hassle of getting "selected" myself, what worries me is that many who SHOULD probably be checked are not being selected, because of the "random" selection process.

 

[TxJasmine]

Taswira,

My comments were not directed at you. I read your entire post. I just wanted to point out that there is a danger in assuming that a bad person will have a certain profile - because they may, or may not. The security issue is a very complex one, and there are no easy solutions. It will take time. And yes, it's ridiculous when toddlers get searched. I fully agree. My DD (7) has also had her backpack full of schoolwork, coloring books, and stuffed animals searched. But, statistically, flying is still safer than driving.

 

[FantasticDisFamily]

Ok, just catching up after being off the boards for several days and had to throw in my 2 cents worth. I truly appreciate the screeners and have no problem with even the seemingly odd approach (from the outside) to selecting folks for random checks. What bothers me is when the screening is used for "punishment".

Last April I was flying from Grand Rapids, MI to Albany, NY with a connection through Detroit Metro on Northwest (anyone whose flown through there knows the hassles to begin with) along with a colleague/friend and her husband. We were headed for a conference and friend's hubby lives on this airline practically. When we checked in for the first leg the ticket agent checked all 3 of us in together, said the planes were very empty and upgraded all 3 of us to first class. Like I said he practically lives on this airline and knows all the folks at the starting end. So far no problem.

When we checked in at the gate in Detroit the gate agent donned an attitude to put it mildly. Said the upgrade could only apply to him and one guest (naturally I said take your wife). He inquired as to whether or not first class had filled that much (very politely) and she really got nasty. Well when it came time to board we all headed for the ramp (remember he flies all the time and knows the ins and outs), they waited for general boarding - even though they had first class seats. Well the gate agent (NOT SECURITY) says to me - "oh no, you're not going on with them and sneak into a first class seat. Over there for an inspection. And you two get on the plane." The security agents were visibly perturbed at this but went through with the search. They were polite and I didn't mind being searched, what I minded was the lack of courtesy on the part of the airline employee.

From a customer service standpoint the "lapse" was compensated for with a first class seat and we all were given wine from the airline. The flight attendants were briefed by my fellow travelers and had history with this woman. I ended up seated next to a gentleman who flies every week and said he has had occasional checks elsewhere (he worked for the FAA) and doesn't mind, but DOES mind that every time he hits that gate with that agent he KNOWS he is going to be searched.

I am hopeful that having professional federal employees will help some of these issues. That more legitimate protocols for searches will be developed.

My 2 cents worth
Deb

 

[taswira]

I <I>knew</I> it had to be Northwest! Yes, the Detroit airport is the worst I encounter anywhere, and Northwest is known among many as "<I>Northworst</I>" (Please don't flame me for that - I'm simply passing on a comment from two airline employees!). I occasionally fly Northwest because of international FF miles acquired on KLM (which is also <I>not</I> my favorite). I must admit, my <I>worst</I> security experiences have all been with NW in Detroit! They must have been with the same person you described!

 

[mcnuss]

Even my airline pilot nephew says the current method of security checks is NOT effective and simply serves to provide a false sense of security. We NEED airport security checks, but we need a better process and a better means of determining who will be checked. This is NOT the fault of any airport security worker. They do what they are trained and told to do. And no - I don't have a solution. More than the hassle of getting "selected" myself, what worries me is that many who SHOULD probably be checked are not being selected, because of the "random" selection process.

AMEN!!!!!

I fly about 2-4 segments per week (just hit my 100th flight just on US Air last week...) and what I see in the airports is a system that is meant to placate the flying public but is in no way superior to what was in place prior to 9/11. Frankly, I feel no more or less safe than I did before that tragic day (and I was in the air that day...). My feeling is that if someone is out to do harm, they will learn and circumvent any system we devise. Just look at Israel. Ok, so terrorists cannot penetrate El Al, but it's not like they lack a zillion other targets. We must, unfortunately, realize that we cannot be 100% safe. And furthermore, we cannot assume that all the terrorists will be foreign-born. Let's not forget Oklahoma City. Nor can we forget that a terrorist will not hesitate to use an innocent person or even a child as an unknowing dupe. Remember that poor pregant Irish girl a few years back whose "fiance" packed her luggage full of explosives before her flight?

Bottom line is that we need a better way to screen at the airports. This so-called "random" system is not the way. We must use intelligent systems that will help to ferret out those who are intent on bad acts. But until that day, we are stuck with what we've got.

 

[jellymoon]

My husband was pulled for a random security check at the gate leaving MCO. This was not a big deal. What was frustrating was that we were not allowed to wait for him, and were ordered to board the plane. This was easier said than done--- I had two strollers, two car seats, a backpack, two carry-on bags, a disabled 7 year old, a hyper 4 year old and two toddlers!!!!

I tried to step and wait just inside the gangway, but they said I must go in and get seated. Fortunately, they recognized the practical challenge in all this and had a staff member help me get everyone safely onto the plane. LOL!!!

 

[KarenMom]

I also had a terrible experience at MCO this last Saturday after returning from our cruise. We were flying United and when we got to the ticket counter we were notified that we were selected for more extensive screening. No problem, but we then had to take our five pieces of luggage over to another area. I was told that I could enter, but that my childeren would have to wait outside. I told them that I was not going to leave my children unattended in an airport (it was just me and my two kids). They kept insisting that I leave my children and I kept insisting that I would gladly cooporate with their security procedures but that there was no way I was going to leave my children unattended. After 4 different people told me the same thing, I just said "No, I'm not doing that" and kept quiet. I completely understand the need or increased security but they are out of their minds to ask a parent to leave two children by themselves in a busy airport. Too top it off I waited 30 minutes in the "random security checkpoint" which is way too long to leave kids alone. I was very disappointed by their attitude.

 

[4cruisin]

I would like to hear an "official explanation" as to why they would expect a parent to leave their children unattended while they are being put through a security screening.

It was bad enough that as an adult, the rest of my traveling party including my husband, were told to board the plane, that they could not wait for me.

I was paranoid at this point that I would not be allowed on the plane and my family would have to leave without me. I knew I had nothing in my carry on but you start to second guess what is happening to you.

I would never, ever, leave my children especially in an airport. The agents are nuts for even considering something like that. I understand that they cannot have 4 or 5 people standing around waiting, but there is no reason why a parent should ever be told to leave their children or why a traveling companion couldn't wait off to one side during the screening process.

I certainly hope that as the federal government takes over the security at airports, they address issues like this.

 

[cruisnfamily]

Karen mom:How was it resolved. Did your children remain with you? How old are the kids?

 

[mcnuss]

TSA Tests Elimination of Gate Screening in Two Pilot Programs

Check this out:

http://www.tsa.gov/briefing_room/PressReleases/tsa10302a.shtm

 

[KarenMom]

My kids are 8 and 11 and I resolved it by not budging. That's probably what led to my 30 minute wait, they probably thought we'll teach this lady a lesson. O.K. by me as long as my kids were safe. I hope this doesn't happen to anyone else.

 

[Dave_from_Marietta]

Originally posted by KarenMom

That's probably what led to my 30 minute wait, they probably thought we'll teach this lady a lesson.

No, long waits for the "special screening" are quite common. My DW has been selected for it twice and it <b><i>definitely</i></b> adds a lot of time to the process.