TSA "FREEZE" Drill

[Tonka's Skipper]

First steps onto the slippery slope are usually small ones. Have you read Martin Niemöller?

As far as congrssional hearings go . . . There have been significantly more than ONE hearing on potential misconduct by TSA employees or otherwise critical of the methods employed by the agency. At least four in the recent past popped up on the first page of a web search.

Better go back and do some reading.those was blogs and comgress people pulling out press releases.................over and over.............there is as I said 1 sub committee and TSA was invited and attended 2, ok maybe 3 or 4 meeting.

Years of talk.......any law changes???........any reqiurements for chanre to the TSA from comgress.*NO*.

BYE.I see now it was not 381 terminations from the TSA for thief,just terminations, no reason given..........seems your credibility takes another shot! In this case you lied outright.

AKK

 

[Greysword]

Originally Posted by Greysword View Post
This is an interesting statement. What are your credentials, AKK?

35 years in the martitime industry.the last 10 or so involved with all transportation secruity.

It seems the NY Times is a little more than an isolated blog who is out to start trouble. Since they are included, as well as other respected publications, in reporting TSA behaviors, I would say these sort of generalized statements fail to make your case, AKK.

The times is far from a A rated paper any more when you count the number of reporters who have admited making up stories and facts and been fired or criminally charged. Granted they still have the name and are well read in the cities.but not much more then that. Enough detail?
I never said there weren't a few bad apples/incidents is 34,000 in the tsa alone, but what a find interested the blogs and the Times never come back and admit it when the real fact do come out and shows there *TAKE* on the problem was reproted wrong!. Beleive me most american dont beleive the main stream press for much of anything anymore.,

There are more than a few "bad apples".

Sorry please provide your proof now? .....I can count about 14 stories repeorted this year ........not alot.and that doesnt count the ones where the agents were shown to have acted correctly after a investigation.........Only a few.*bad Apples*

Personal note:
I can understand the reason for the "freeze drill", as the TSA has let people through with items that should have been caught, and it is easier to inconvenience those in the area instead of rescreening the whole airport. That said, I think they take it way too seriously. Practice is to ingrain immediate actions, so they are performed without thought, but forcing someone not to "fidget" is just plain silly.

I I have to agree on this one.to try and make peole freze is a bit over the top.this is the first I have hread of this.I intend to read up a bit

In addition, I have come to realize that the role of the TSA is to provide the appearance of security, with the ancillary benefit of being able to be more vigilant to those security measures required before September 2001. Actually delivering security against terrorist attack would require different processes and procedures, which are well documented and tested in other parts of the world, but are not the focus of the TSA.

and YOUR credentials to say that? What happens directly with the public is a very small part of the overall secruity role of the TSA and other groups.....

There has not been a terrorist attack on an airline originating from the United States since September 2001; however, many of the more draconian requirements have been mandated years after the initial engagement. In addition, these enhanced requirements were not based on any actionable intelligence or imminent threat to airline safety; rather, they were implemented due to actions of terrorists on aircraft, which originated outside of our nation. To that end and based on the lack of evidence suggesting these enhancements and the TSA are at all effective, it stands to reason that we should be relaxing security and instead focusing our money and attention toward those efforts that would be effective in stemming the tide of a future terrorist attack.

again your proof?.credentials to say that?........Maybe just maybe the fact we have the secruity we have may have forcesd the terroriest to not weven try and take down a plane. Not to mention you have no idea if there has been any planned attacks or if TSA, FBI, CIA etc have stopped it early on...How ever I will tell you are far off the mark in this statement.

These are my thoughts. I don't consider myself anti-security or anti-TSA, but the empirical evidence of the agency's lack of

You are entitled to have your opinion.

Thanks for the reply, AKK. I really don't have any credentials, to speak of publicly, so these are merely my thoughts and position based on observation. As mentioned, I'm not anti-TSA, per se, as I agree the mere presence of security tends to deter some nefarious activity by those seeking to do us harm. In fact, I enjoy the professionalism of all the TSA agents I've encountered, thus far. Even if I felt they were cranky or plain not nice, they were very professional in nature. They are paid low wage and assigned a high degree of responsibility, so I have no beef with the agents, themselves.

I guess the concern I have is in regards to the reason behind the policies and procedures, as well as the consistency of their application. Underlying is the concept that government is reactive in nature. They need to be in most cases, as to do otherwise would be an infringement on our freedoms.

To that end, many of the more "tiresome" requirements (3-1-1 bags, no shoes, super sensitive metal detection, full body scans, etc) are in direct response to terrorist activities occurring on aircraft over U.S. cities, which originated in other nations (the shoe bomber, for instance). They are not due to a lack of vigilance by our own security and law enforcement agencies, and I perceive the restrictions more as the mandates by politicians needed to appear proactive instead of providing any real security. Of course, the line TSA agents and supervisors may question the zaniness of a mandate; while, they carry out their duties, professionally as always.

I think this Freeze Drill is a reaction to a couple incidents, where people have made it through security with unsearched bags or contraband (for instance a woman that made it past security with a gun: http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/...-dfw-for-bringing-gun-onto-aa-flight/606403/1). It could be effective, and I could understand the need for agents to make everyone "freeze" in place (not move) during a real breach, but someone should announce it as a drill, and permit greater flexibility during such tests, so a boarding is not missed or a person wets themselves who "really needed to visit the facilities" .

As for example as to why I personally have the opinion that the TSA is mainly a perceived security instead of an actual one:

Homeless man causes breach in San Diego:
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/state&id=8681893

Mom gets $3.99 refund on peanut butter (the point isn't the refund, rather that the agent didn't confiscate the jelly, too, which to me is more jell-like
http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/20...tsa-to-shell-out-399-for-seized-peanut-butter

Blogger posts about TSA encounter:
http://crankyflier.com/2012/09/27/ridiculous-security-theater-courtesy-of-the-tsa/
(this one gets me a bit, since if he was a real terrorist, he could have easily chosen several paths to get through security with illicit material. This was just for the agents to CYA themselves. While AKK may not agree, since it is a blogger, it is a personal account of activity, and since the person isn't anti-TSA, it has a bit of credence.)

In the end, I agree that a perceived increase in security has a deterrent effect that is valuable, and TSA agents are very professional. I just wish we could have more consistency (between agents in the same airport and among all airports) and maybe stop some of the more inconvenient aspects that really were initiated as a reaction to activities outside of our nation's security bubble.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

First steps onto the slippery slope are usually small ones. Have you read Martin Niemöller?

As far as congrssional hearings go . . . There have been significantly more than ONE hearing on potential misconduct by TSA employees or otherwise critical of the methods employed by the agency. At least four in the recent past popped up on the first page of a web search.

Better go back and do some reading .Those were blogs and congress people putting out press releases.................over and over.............there is as I said 1 sub committee and TSA was invited and attended 2, ok maybe 3 or 4 meetings.

Years of talk(do you really think the congress people were doing anything else but getting press time and votes?).......any law changes???........any reqiurements for change to the TSA from congress........*NO*.

BYW....I see now it was not 381 terminations from the TSA for thief, just terminations, no reason given..........seems your credibility takes another shot! In this case you lied outright.

AKK

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Thanks for the reply, AKK. I really don't have any credentials, to speak of publicly, so these are merely my thoughts and position based on observation. As mentioned, I'm not anti-TSA, per se, as I agree the mere presence of security tends to deter some nefarious activity by those seeking to do us harm. In fact, I enjoy the professionalism of all the TSA agents I've encountered, thus far. Even if I felt they were cranky or plain not nice, they were very professional in nature. They are paid low wage and assigned a high degree of responsibility, so I have no beef with the agents, themselves.

I guess the concern I have is in regards to the reason behind the policies and procedures, as well as the consistency of their application. Underlying is the concept that government is reactive in nature. They need to be in most cases, as to do otherwise would be an infringement on our freedoms.

To that end, many of the more "tiresome" requirements (3-1-1 bags, no shoes, super sensitive metal detection, full body scans, etc) are in direct response to terrorist activities occurring on aircraft over U.S. cities, which originated in other nations (the show bomber, for instance). They are not due to a lack of vigilance by our own security and law enforcement agencies, and I perceive the restrictions more as the mandates by politicians needed to appear proactive instead of providing any real security. Of course, the line TSA agents and supervisors may question the zaniness of a mandate; while, they carry out their duties, professionally as always.

I think this Freeze Drill is a reaction to a couple incidents, where people have made it through security with unsearched bags or contraband (for instance a woman that made it past security with a gun: http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/...-dfw-for-bringing-gun-onto-aa-flight/606403/1). It could be effective, and I could understand the need for agents to make everyone "freeze" in place (not move) during a real breach, but someone should announce it as a drill, and permit greater flexibility during such tests, so a boarding is not missed or a person wets themselves who "really needed to visit the facilities" .

As for example as to why I personally have the opinion that the TSA is mainly a perceived security instead of an actual one:

Homeless man causes breach in San Diego:
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/state&id=8681893

Mom gets $3.99 refund on peanut butter (the point isn't the refund, rather that the agent didn't confiscate the jelly, too, which to me is more jell-like
http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/20...tsa-to-shell-out-399-for-seized-peanut-butter

Blogger posts about TSA encounter:
http://crankyflier.com/2012/09/27/ridiculous-security-theater-courtesy-of-the-tsa/
(this one gets me a bit, since if he was a real terrorist, he could have easily chosen several paths to get through security with illicit material. This was just for the agents to CYA themselves. While AKK may not agree, since it is a blogger, it is a personal account of activity, and since the person isn't anti-TSA, it has a bit of credence.)

In the end, I agree that a perceived increase in security has a deterrent effect that is valuable, and TSA agents are very professional. I just wish we could stop some of the more inconvenient aspects that really were initiated as a reaction to activities outside of our nation's security bubble.

Hi there Greysword,

I agree with alot of what you have said. But I can point out that a few years ago, I don't remember which year, but TSA found and stopped 254people with handguns from getting onboard planes.....there is still a very real threat in domestic flights. I fully agree the tSA is not perfect and won't get or stop every restricted or dangerous item from getting on a plane. They are NOT PERFECT. I do object strongly to the people (not you) that go on and on whenever something is missed or a mistake made by TSA, calling the folks trying to do their jobs in a professional, honest and effective way!

I do think the TSA like many agencies, companys, military can get bogged down in rules and forget sometimes what the rules are trying to do.

We deal with it in handling ships and the maritime terminals. Sometimes you have to go though 2....3 or even 4 check/seciurty points before you can get onboard the vessels.

I agree this freeze drill needs more work. The TSA can't expect people to fully understand if they dont know about what the drill is intended to do (or the actual emergency) and if they are not aware of what is expected of them. Honestly..you can't expect people to stand or sit for that matter frozen! Some people can't phyically do it due to health issues.

Lastly, yes your right, some things were a knee jerk reaction, but there has also been changes to lessen the inconvenient things. The problem is that the days of just walking on a plane like in the 60's and 70's is never coming back until a screening machine is developed that will do a total and 100% safe scan and still give the people the feeling of safety and not risking percieved possible injury or lack of privacy.

Right now that is a big order to fill, so we have to make do with what is available .

I miss the days when I was heading from a ship to the planes and I could just run right to the gate, ticket in hand and walk on the plane!

The good ole Days!


AKK

 

[Greysword]

Hi there Greysword,

I agree with alot of what you have said. But I can point out that a few years ago, I don't remember which year, but TSA found and stopped 254people with handguns from getting onboard planes.....there is still a very real threat in domestic flights.

As I mentioned in my first post of the thread, the TSA has enhanced the effectiveness of the normal security screening process in place before September 2011. They are able to catch many more potential threats just due to Americans not thinking. This is a secondary mandate, which seems to be proven effective.

I do think the TSA like many agencies, companys, military can get bogged down in rules and forget sometimes what the rules are trying to do.

I agree with an earlier post you made about agents being able to be flexible, but I also think it is important that anyone using judgement should be well versed in the core rules. Unfortunately, the flying public don't even know where to find the TSA's website, let alone know the rules. This causes the agents to get blamed for actions that are well documented, but sometimes they make exceptions to keep the peace. In my opinion, they should stick to the rules as written, and let a manager talk to the flyer if there is a disagreement. While making exceptions has the appearance of providing positive customer service, sometimes it actually causes problems for agents at other times, who try to enforce the rules.

Maybe the TSA checkpoints should have the rules printed and available for flyers who have disagreements. This way, and agent not sure can quickly look it up and will have a document to show the flyer the rules at the point of contention.

Lastly, yes your right, some things were a knee jerk reaction, but there has also been changes to lessen the inconvenient things. The problem is that the days of just walking on a plane like in the 60's and 70's is never coming back until a screening machine is developed that will do a total and 100% safe scan and still give the people the feeling of safety and not risking percieved possible injury or lack of privacy.

Luckily, the TSA is working on a solution to this very problem. The TSA Pre-Check system looks like it may be a winner. The problem is in it's implementation. To keep things random, the TSA is unable to guarantee pre-check qualified flyers the ability to take advantage of the program, so these flyers must still arrive early. At least if they end up not being allowed to zoom through security (like the old days), then they are directed to the front of the next available line. This makes flying a legacy airline with the proper background check complete worth something.

In addition, the senior leadership figured out that elderly and very young people pose a significantly reduced threat, so they are able to keep shoes and coats on. I think this was one of the "wide swath" policies that TSA agents had to carry out, which was initiated by politicians trying to CYA.

The CLEAR system (http://clearme.com/home) is an outstanding study in American's behavioral patterns! Unfortunately, it is only available in a few airports. This service provides per-screening, as well, but requires an annual fee. However, what would American's choose: deal with TSA lines or pay $180/year/person to get security like pre-September 11th? Of course, many won't pay for the convenience, but the option is there. As such, anyone here that does complain about TSA should sign-up for Pre-Check ($50 for NEXUS, $100 for Global Entry) or CLEAR and fly a legacy airline to avoid the scanners, laptop and shoe removal, and whisk through security like the "good old days".

 

[CPT Tripss]

Mea culpa . . . when I wrote

Whether the people doing these things are "nice, "polite," or "professional." Is really beside the point. They are loud, "impolite," or otherwise exhibit a prison guard like demeanor, then they only add to the criticism.

I left out a very important word . . . "when". It should have read, Whether the people doing these things are "nice, "polite," or "professional." Is really beside the point. When They are loud, "impolite," or otherwise exhibit a prison guard like demeanor, then they only add to the criticism.

 

[CPT Tripss]

Better go back and do some reading.those was blogs and comgress people pulling out press releases.................over and over.............there is as I said 1 sub committee and TSA was invited and attended 2, ok maybe 3 or 4 meeting.

Years of talk.......any law changes???........any reqiurements for chanre to the TSA from comgress.*NO*.

BYE.I see now it was not 381 terminations from the TSA for thief,just terminations, no reason given..........seems your credibility takes another shot! In this case you lied outright.

AKK

You missed the c-span listing of several televised hearings.

You are absolutely wrong, again. I quoted/paraphrased from the TSA blog. "... a total of 381 TSOs have been terminated for theft ..." You can find it here - http://blog.tsa.gov/search?updated-max=2012-09-28T16:53:00-04:00&max-results=10

 

[CPT Tripss]

This is a sad commentary on TSA's management and training. It's an extraordinary fail rate.

Screeners at Newark Liberty International Airport are properly executing standard pat-downs of passengers only 16.7 percent of the time and they identify and take appropriate action on prohibited items in only a quarter of all cases, according to a secret internal report.

The revelations are contained in a document, obtained by The Star-Ledger, titled "PACE Airport Evaluation" and dated June 8. It was compiled by an undercover team of Transportation Security Administration employees from other airports who were asked to observe screeners at work at Newark Liberty.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/10/secret_observers_find_shocking.html

 

[goofy4tink]

Okay guys...I think the vast majority here can agree that there is a lot of room for improvement within the TSA. A lot of what is done is just theatre..if you will. But, I'm going to watch this thread just to be sure it doesn't go nutty.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

You missed the c-span listing of several televised hearings.

You are absolutely wrong, again. I quoted/paraphrased from the TSA blog. "... a total of 381 TSOs have been terminated for theft ..." You can find it here - http://blog.tsa.gov/search?updated-max=2012-09-28T16:53:00-04:00&max-results=10

I have to eat a little crow...............Your right 381 for thief.I was reading another post who stated that....my error and applogy.



Now your parephrasing, but you convently left off the facts in the same paragragh.........that this is .4% not the 1% you *quoted*.........seems you tell only the story that you think supports your story..........in other words.you lied to us all here.....


Now I qoute the article:

***To put theft at TSA in perspective, between May 1, 2003 through September 2012, a total of 381 TSOs have been terminated for theft, which represents less than 1/2 of one percent (0.4%) of officers that have been employed by the agency. This extremely small percentage does not reflect the dedication and professionalism of our workforce as a whole.***


So you proved my point...a *VERY, VERY FEW* bad apples.but anywhere near the *MANY* you keep trying to get people to beleive!

And gee........look a little lower at all the guns, black powder, hand gernades, knifes that the TSA has caught...........funny you couldn't even bring yourself to give the TSA credit when they did well!......

The C-span television was the one listed they often meet more then 1 day, as the congress people need to get lots of camera time to get money any votes. They still didn't do anything at all...no legislatiuon, proposals, changes in the law........just lots of tlak for their own purposes.!................

Keep digging that hole Tripps, your just about over your head now!

AKK

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Mea culpa . . . when I wrote


I left out a very important word . . . "when". It should have read, Whether the people doing these things are "nice, "polite," or "professional." Is really beside the point. When They are loud, "impolite," or otherwise exhibit a prison guard like demeanor, then they only add to the criticism.

Sure you left out the *when*...sure......AKK

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

As I mentioned in my first post of the thread, the TSA has enhanced the effectiveness of the normal security screening process in place before September 2011. They are able to catch many more potential threats just due to Americans not thinking. This is a secondary mandate, which seems to be proven effective.

I agree with an earlier post you made about agents being able to be flexible, but I also think it is important that anyone using judgement should be well versed in the core rules. Unfortunately, the flying public don't even know where to find the TSA's website, let alone know the rules. This causes the agents to get blamed for actions that are well documented, but sometimes they make exceptions to keep the peace. In my opinion, they should stick to the rules as written, and let a manager talk to the flyer if there is a disagreement. While making exceptions has the appearance of providing positive customer service, sometimes it actually causes problems for agents at other times, who try to enforce the rules.

Maybe the TSA checkpoints should have the rules printed and available for flyers who have disagreements. This way, and agent not sure can quickly look it up and will have a document to show the flyer the rules at the point of contention.

Luckily, the TSA is working on a solution to this very problem. The TSA Pre-Check system looks like it may be a winner. The problem is in it's implementation. To keep things random, the TSA is unable to guarantee pre-check qualified flyers the ability to take advantage of the program, so these flyers must still arrive early. At least if they end up not being allowed to zoom through security (like the old days), then they are directed to the front of the next available line. This makes flying a legacy airline with the proper background check complete worth something.

In addition, the senior leadership figured out that elderly and very young people pose a significantly reduced threat, so they are able to keep shoes and coats on. I think this was one of the "wide swath" policies that TSA agents had to carry out, which was initiated by politicians trying to CYA.

The CLEAR system (http://clearme.com/home) is an outstanding study in American's behavioral patterns! Unfortunately, it is only available in a few airports. This service provides per-screening, as well, but requires an annual fee. However, what would American's choose: deal with TSA lines or pay $180/year/person to get security like pre-September 11th? Of course, many won't pay for the convenience, but the option is there. As such, anyone here that does complain about TSA should sign-up for Pre-Check ($50 for NEXUS, $100 for Global Entry) or CLEAR and fly a legacy airline to avoid the scanners, laptop and shoe removal, and whisk through security like the "good old days".

You have pointed out that their are new, better options, so people flying have the choice. If the pat downs and the scanners are a problem for some poeple they have a way out.

The price for the cards is about the same we pay for our secriuty cards .*TWIC*, Transportation worker Identifcation cards*. We need these to get onto Marine terminals and other secure areas. The cost is $160.00 for 5 years. Are you sure its $180.00 per year?


As we said before as time and techno improves, so will the hoops we have to go though for safe flying!

AKK

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

This is a sad commentary on TSA's management and training. It's an extraordinary fail rate.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/10/secret_observers_find_shocking.html

Totally correct........this is a major issue.!

Seems that this PACE indentified just what they were intended to......to find problems and set in motion the steps need to correct things!

I hope the action is fast!

AKK

 

[Greysword]

Are you sure its $180.00 per year?


As we said before as time and techno improves, so will the hoops we have to go though for safe flying!

AKK

This is from the ClearMe website:

Pricing
Standard unlimited annual pricing plan is $179. Corporate rates available. Detailed pricing information will be provided during step 3 of Enrollment.

However if I were regularly flying out of the handful of listed airports, I'd get it. It would be worth the money, IMO.

We watched the new show on the Travel Channel Miami Airport 24/7, and one of the episodes focused on the TSA. Afterwards DW says, "wow, I have a renewed respect for the TSA agents."

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

This is from the ClearMe website:
However if I were regularly flying out of the handful of listed airports, I'd get it. It would be worth the money, IMO.

We watched the new show on the Travel Channel Miami Airport 24/7, and one of the episodes focused on the TSA. Afterwards DW says, "wow, I have a renewed respect for the TSA agents."

Hi Grey,

I was just wondering if it was 1 year or 5............guess the goberment thinks they can get more money out of passingers!.*G*.

I do agree it is still worth the money if you fly enough and out of those airports. Luckly I don't fly as much as I use to.


I saw that advertized, but I didn't see it...........I will be on the look out for it! There is so much more that goes on behind the scenes and in supporting the agnets working the seciurty lines.

Seems in Newark, TSA does have a problem. Tripps posted the article, and I have to agree with her...........It is a BIG Issue!.......take a look!

AKK

 

[goofy4tink]

Ok...I think we've talked this one to death. Hate to seem heavy handed, but this discussion really serves no purpose. Head over to Flyertalk and discuss it there. Has no bearing on WDW travel issues.