good news tsa rethinking pat downs

[disney david]

the head of the tsa says the pat downs might have went to far.


http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/tsa-responds-passenger-outrages-underwear-search-happen/story?id=12208932


Please keep your response in the guide lines of the boards i dont want this to get closed or in trouble. Just read it and dont feel like you have to comment if you cant keep the response civil. Just remeber everyone has a opion and is entitled to their opinion.

 

[Lewisc]

I don't see how it's good news.

Not good news if the TSA reduces security as a result of public pressure.

Not really good news if the TSA tells us the rules they implemented were never necessary.

Fortunately there is a middle ground. The article doesn't say the TSA is rethinking pat downs. It does say the individual TSA employee may have gone overboard in a few instances. Putting a hand inside underwear.

 

[disney david]

I don't see how it's good news.

Not good news if the TSA reduces security as a result of public pressure.

Not really good news if the TSA tells us the rules they implemented were never necessary.

Fortunately there is a middle ground. The article doesn't say the TSA is rethinking pat downs. It does say the individual TSA employee may have gone overboard in a few instances. Putting a hand inside underwear.

That what I meant about the pat downs and them rethinking on how to do them their ways to do to protect people with out going over board. But just because ne agent went over board dose not mean all do but they need to come up with something that can get the job done and not have the feeling of going over board.

 

[CPT Tripss]

I guess this is a good place for my mea culpa. In several threads, I responded that TSA was no longer patting down kids. I was wrong.

TSA is apparently just modifying this process, whatever that means.

Sorry for my error, parents, you'll still need to taalk to your kids about the "touch" issues.

 

[Lewisc]

From the NY Times (via times reader)

Transportation Security Administration, John S. Pistole, said in a statement that his agency would try to make screening methods “as minimally invasive as possible.”

Sounds more like "fine tuning" then a major change.

 

[goofy4tink]

What is needed is consistency...at every airport, by every TSA person. Proceedure can not differ by agent or airport. The general public needs to know what to expect.
I have no issue with children being patted down. My own dd has undergone patdowns before and she's just fine today. Of course, we aren't talking about the newer more 'extensive' patdowns here...just the old-fashioned ones we were all familier with. So, if a child opts out of the new scanner or if he/she sets off an alarm then fine, go with that patdown, but not the more agressive one.
So again...it's a question of consistency. Patdowns can't be changing from person to person or airport to airport. All agents need to be on the same page. Agent Bill can't do pat downs aggressively at Logan while Agent Tom is doing a more cursory patdown for the exact same situation at TF Green.

 

[Magalex]

We had a flight out of Orlando on Friday 11/19. Myself & 10 yr old son had to go through the full body scanner. Yes I had to take off my belt & the female agent had her hand in my jeans & underwear on top. Also checked my Mickey watch. I was very upset for my DS also. My DH did not go through the full body scan.

 

[sam_gordon]

What is needed is consistency...at every airport, by every TSA person. Proceedure can not differ by agent or airport. The general public needs to know what to expect.
I have no issue with children being patted down. My own dd has undergone patdowns before and she's just fine today. Of course, we aren't talking about the newer more 'extensive' patdowns here...just the old-fashioned ones we were all familier with. So, if a child opts out of the new scanner or if he/she sets off an alarm then fine, go with that patdown, but not the more agressive one.
So again...it's a question of consistency. Patdowns can't be changing from person to person or airport to airport. All agents need to be on the same page. Agent Bill can't do pat downs aggressively at Logan while Agent Tom is doing a more cursory patdown for the exact same situation at TF Green.

Agreed. 100%

 

[goofy4tink]

We had a flight out of Orlando on Friday 11/19. Myself & 10 yr old son had to go through the full body scanner. Yes I had to take off my belt & the female agent had her hand in my jeans & underwear on top. Also checked my Mickey watch. I was very upset for my DS also. My DH did not go through the full body scan.

People have routinely had to remove belts and watches...never mattered what type scanner you went through.
My issue is why you had to be patted down if you both went through the scanner?? I was under the assumption (knowing what happens when 'one' asumes) that you got the pat down if you refused the scanner, or if you set off an alarm. Did both you and your ds set off an alarm??
Just trying to wrap my head around this whole thing.

 

[olwyngdh]

What is needed is consistency...at every airport, by every TSA person. Proceedure can not differ by agent or airport. The general public needs to know what to expect.
I have no issue with children being patted down. My own dd has undergone patdowns before and she's just fine today. Of course, we aren't talking about the newer more 'extensive' patdowns here...just the old-fashioned ones we were all familier with. So, if a child opts out of the new scanner or if he/she sets off an alarm then fine, go with that patdown, but not the more agressive one.
So again...it's a question of consistency. Patdowns can't be changing from person to person or airport to airport. All agents need to be on the same page. Agent Bill can't do pat downs aggressively at Logan while Agent Tom is doing a more cursory patdown for the exact same situation at TF Green.

Exactly. Fair and equal treatment under the law.

 

[Lewisc]

What is needed is consistency...at every airport, by every TSA person. Proceedure can not differ by agent or airport. The general public needs to know what to expect.
.....

Consistency is helpful for the passenger but not necessarily good for security.

The IRS doesn't audit every taxpayer. Some audits are more detailed then others. The possibility of audit keeps at least some taxpayers more honest then they otherwise would be.

Every knows exactly how the screening will be done then "bad people" know how to hide "bad stuff". Vary the procedures slightly and "bad people" aren't sure if they'll be able to get away with it.. Do a complete check on 90% of the passengers. Will "bad people" take those odds. What about 50%.

 

[Minnie Lor]

People have routinely had to remove belts and watches...never mattered what type scanner you went through.
My issue is why you had to be patted down if you both went through the scanner?? I was under the assumption (knowing what happens when 'one' asumes) that you got the pat down if you refused the scanner, or if you set off an alarm. Did both you and your ds set off an alarm??
Just trying to wrap my head around this whole thing.

I've heard several cases and know of one case where no alarms were set off and no one asked for an opt-out but still had an enhanced pat-down after the scan. THAT's my big issue. I have lots of issues with this whole thing but won't go there.

 

[CPT Tripss]

People have routinely had to remove belts and watches...never mattered what type scanner you went through.
My issue is why you had to be patted down if you both went through the scanner?? I was under the assumption (knowing what happens when 'one' asumes) that you got the pat down if you refused the scanner, or if you set off an alarm. Did both you and your ds set off an alarm??
Just trying to wrap my head around this whole thing.

Just FYI . . . a regular poster over on FT says he is a TSA screener and is accepted as such reports that one should never have to remove a wristwatch absent an alarm. In my experience, belt removal is seldom required . . . although many people do so. I have never been required to empty my pockets unless I alarmed and then it was, "do you have any metal in your pockets." These statements apply to the WTMD.

With the new procedures . . . . . . good luck with head wrapping.

ETA: Without consistancy (at some level) and open communication of what the TSA administration deems acceptable conduct by their employees, how do flyers know whether a screening has gone "too far?"

 

[Magalex]

No alarms went off. How it sounded they saw my belt in the scanner. It is a simple cloth belt with a loop in the front & not bulky(a summer belt that comes with women's shorts). No thoughts about checking my watch. And about my DS using the full body scanner, I went into a mama bear mode because they were touching me and I couldn't see what they were doing with him. He was fine but you just have to wonder when as a parent we have to sign field trip papers for school & when in our daily lives a underage child needs every parent's consent for everything. But this situation the agent didn't know who he belonged too because my DS got separated by both parents.

I am a big follower of rules everywhere and I agree with the post that they need guidelines for all agents to follow exact, not make it up as they go along.

 

[goofy4tink]

I do understand that things have to be kept 'flexible' and we don't want terrorists to know exactly what it going to happen in security screenings. BUT...consistency is still a fair thing to expect. For the life of me I can't think of any reason why two people, pretty much the same, should receive two different type pat downs. If one person set off an alarm, then fine. But, if you have, say, two women going through security, and they both go through the same scanner, with no alarms going off, why should it be okay for one woman to be more agressively patted down, while the other woman gets swiped down and sent on her way??
It needs to be the same for everyone...no surprises. That's all I ask. There are just too many reports of varying degrees of searches. I really think we need to start bringing in bomb sniffing dogs. They are reliable... more so than the vast majority of TSA people. Yes, they are expensive. Yes, some people are allergic to dogs. But, it is what it is. If for some reason you can't be around a dog, then you get the enhanced pat down with bomb residue swabs. You could be provided with a nose mask to fend off any allergens for the brief time you are beng 'sniffed'.

 

[Lewisc]

We don't want a system where the physical attributes of a passenger (age, dimensions, sex, etc.) determines which passenger gets selected for extra screening.

We also don't want a system where passengers (and by extension terrorists) know exactly what to expect.

Selecting some passengers for secondary screening on a random basis makes a lot of sense.

I do understand that things have to be kept 'flexible' and we don't want terrorists to know exactly what it going to happen in security screenings. BUT...consistency is still a fair thing to expect. For the life of me I can't think of any reason why two people, pretty much the same, should receive two different type pat downs. If one person set off an alarm, then fine. But, if you have, say, two women going through security, and they both go through the same scanner, with no alarms going off, why should it be okay for one woman to be more agressively patted down, while the other woman gets swiped down and sent on her way??
It needs to be the same for everyone...no surprises. That's all I ask. There are just too many reports of varying degrees of searches. I really think we need to start bringing in bomb sniffing dogs. They are reliable... more so than the vast majority of TSA people. Yes, they are expensive. Yes, some people are allergic to dogs. But, it is what it is. If for some reason you can't be around a dog, then you get the enhanced pat down with bomb residue swabs. You could be provided with a nose mask to fend off any allergens for the brief time you are beng 'sniffed'.

 

[GraceLuvsWDW]

Personally, I would be happier with a bomb sniffing dog than the inappropriate touching and nude body scans. I would be willing to submit to anything that doesn't make me feel violated. I am finding a lot of the men I talk to are fine with the new scanners, but the women seem to be much more modest. And pretty much universally, people with children are concerned, at the least.

As far as the cost of the dogs. If each airport has 4-8 scanners at ~$200,000 each I think the dogs would be cheaper. And I would also consent to swapping for residue of me and my daughter. I think these are reasonable alternatives.

 

[Disflyer]

I know I don't post much but I just have to regarding this issue. My biggest issue with this whole process is that it is strictly reactive on the TSA's part. I can understand having the technology as a tool to use but what is the "test" that is used to determine whether or not I am to go through it?

Why can't we spend our tax dollars on proactive measures to identify those passengers who are the highest threat? A one way ticket, no bags, an overly nervous flyer... These are small but very easy and identifiable traits the TSA should be using to determine if somebody deserves more scrutiny. Having a one size fits all standard is not good, it allows our “enemies” time to determine ways to beat the system. A police officer must have “reasonable suspicion” (less than probable cause) as the “test” to pat me down for weapons, merely being on a dark street alone does not give him the right to look for weapons. I understand the difference between a pat-down search and an administrative search but I have never heard of an administrative search being conducted in such violation of personal liberties.

The former AA CEO said it best; we are looking for people not "things".

 

[disneymayz]

I am just saying if I go thru the body scanner and then they want to pat me down then I will walk over to where they want me to go and just strip naked.

If you don't want to be pulled..... don't wear jewelry, belts, etc. Put it all in your carry on. I even put my wallet and keys in my carry on when I get in line. I want nothing on me. Most times I wear mesh shorts, t-shirt, socks and sneakers. If I need to be dresses some other way I change after going thru security. This way there is no need for anything to trigger the "alarms".

 

[Mrs. Charming]

I do understand that things have to be kept 'flexible' and we don't want terrorists to know exactly what it going to happen in security screenings. BUT...consistency is still a fair thing to expect. For the life of me I can't think of any reason why two people, pretty much the same, should receive two different type pat downs. If one person set off an alarm, then fine. But, if you have, say, two women going through security, and they both go through the same scanner, with no alarms going off, why should it be okay for one woman to be more agressively patted down, while the other woman gets swiped down and sent on her way??
It needs to be the same for everyone...no surprises. That's all I ask. There are just too many reports of varying degrees of searches. I really think we need to start bringing in bomb sniffing dogs. They are reliable... more so than the vast majority of TSA people. Yes, they are expensive. Yes, some people are allergic to dogs. But, it is what it is. If for some reason you can't be around a dog, then you get the enhanced pat down with bomb residue swabs. You could be provided with a nose mask to fend off any allergens for the brief time you are beng 'sniffed'.

The machines are expensive too! Hmm, I wonder how many TSA agents can be replaced by one bomb-sniffing dog. I have to say this: I'm allergic to dogs and I'd rather be sniffed from top to bottom by a dog than either "patted down" or put through a machine. Heck, it can lick me, I'll itch for awhile, I'll get hives, and my eyes will itch like heck... but I'll take some benadryl, I don't care! Swab me for bomb residue. That's fine by me, they won't find anything.