TSA mess and the police

[DisneyBamaFan]

Who was unhappy with the security methods that were being used prior to the new ones? I wasn't - and I felt extremely safe while flying - even shortly after 9/11..

Now that we have taken this step forward in additional screening, many people would feel unhappy with a step backwards - myself included. I would get over it in about 2 seconds, but I would bet that many would not. I can picture the thread now...

 

[kaytieeldr]

I'm getting extremely tired of the attempts to cast aspersions on my intelligence. I happen to have a documented IQ of 185. Yes. 185. That's more than five standard deviations above the norm.

Good for you. My IQ is only 138 - well above average, but certainly not high enough to know or care how many standard deviations above the norm that places me. But I understand that a single/anecdotal experience doesn't - can't, actually - prove anything except that single experience.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Who was unhappy with the security methods that were being used prior to the new ones? I wasn't - and I felt extremely safe while flying - even shortly after 9/11..

Homeland Security? Department of Defense? President? Congress? Outraged citizens? Friends and family who lost loved ones on/due to 9/11?

 

[OceanAnnie]

Who was unhappy with the security methods that were being used prior to the new ones? I wasn't - and I felt extremely safe while flying - even shortly after 9/11..

I thought it was fine, but I do think there are new threats to address. I just don't think this is the way, FWIW. I believe the new system was in response to last year's Christmas attempt. The irony is it was reported the new system won't pick up the type of explosives that were used. The enhanced pat down would though.

I read an interesting article this morning.

TSA: New Scanners Kept Many Illegal or Dangerous Items Off Planes This Year

By Diane Macedo

Published November 18, 2010

"Airport passenger screening measures have become a touchy issue in the U.S. in the past week, but in the past year the controversial measures have detected more than 130 prohibited, illegal or dangerous items that otherwise would have made it onto airplanes, the Transportation Security Administration says."...

(That was over the past year.)

"...But in the future, he said, the TSA should "stop looking for bad objects or bad things and start looking for bad people."

..."The government has a lot of information on everyone who gets on a plane… so let’s integrate that intelligence into the checkpoint," he said. "Today the checkpoint is just looking for bad objects – like tweezers and shampoo, but the agent doesn’t know anything about the traveler."

With a quick background check, Lott said, agents could better assess the risk associated with each traveler, then use things like scanners and pat-downs to further analyze those deemed high risk."...



http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/18/tsa-enhanced-imaging-kept-illegal-dangerous-items-plans-year/

 

[C.Ann]

That post to JLT was exceptionally below the belt.

Yes - it was..

Outraged citizens? Friends and family who lost loved ones on/due to 9/11?

Immediately after 9/11? Yes..

In the past 6 years or more? Sorry - I have heard no outrage from any flyers - nor have I heard or read about anyone not feeling "safe" (or "safe enough") with the measures that were in place prior to these most recent changes..

If that were truly the case, the number of flyers would have dropped dramatically - just like they did for awhile right after 9/11..

 

[kaytieeldr]

The irony is it was reported the new system won't pick up the type of explosives that were used.

Nor would metal detectors - since the materials used were, reportedly, plastics.

 

[OceanAnnie]

Nor would metal detectors - since the materials used were, reportedly, plastics.

Yes. But the new machines were in response to the attempt. That's the difference.

 

[Jennasis]

Yes - it was..



Immediately after 9/11? Yes..

In the past 6 years or more? Sorry - I have heard no outrage from any flyers - nor have I heard or read about anyone not feeling "safe" (or "safe enough") with the measures that were in place prior to these most recent changes..

If that were truly the case, the number of flyers would have dropped dramatically - just like they did for awhile right after 9/11..

That's kind of the test isn't it? The numbers of travelers didn't drop over Thanksgiving weekend either...the busiest travel weekend all year. Seems to me that people can be "outraged" and still fly.

If people are so upset about the travel procedures, you'd think they'd stop flying. However, history has shown this to be not the case, including the recent outrage over the new procedures. When push comes to shove, people seem to suck it up pretty well.

 

[DMRick]

In the particular situation at hand, I have to agree.. It's becoming extremely insulting for the poster on the receiving end - who has been nothing but polite..

Just so it's not misumderstood..I didn't say that one over the other was the receiving end...it's a 2 way street. I think anyone who is agravated by another should use the ignore.

 

[eliza61]

.

No matter how we set up screening, some people are going to be unhappy.

Ding ding ding. we have a winner and this is what has been the problem since day one. Every single solution from bomb sniffing dogs to profiling to puffer machines, EVERY THING has issues or critics. For each and every method you can find a so called "expert" in the field who has written a paper on why that particular method will not work.
They will always be some group or person who for what ever reason cannot adhere to the method and who's "constitutional" rights are being violated.

We are a walmart society. We want security, we just want it cheap, 100% effective and it should not inconvenience any one in any way.

Good luck with that.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

...Immediately after 9/11? Yes..

In the past 6 years or more? Sorry...

As someone who lost hundreds of friends on 9/11, I agree with this. There were a few tough years, but I got over it. I still traveled extensively, though with a great deal of trepidation early on. Heck, I remember being afraid just walking through Penn Station for a while. Nowhere but home felt "safe".

The screening that they put in place to catch the most obvious threats made me feel somewhat safer, but only time healed. I now have no second thoughts when I travel, and that has nothing to do with security measures in place. Then again, I have friends who are still not over it - may never be. For them, no security measure will likely ever be sufficient.

 

[kaytieeldr]

That post to JLT was exceptionally below the belt.

Yes - it was..

I don't agree. The response I read was clarifying and explanatory. Again, a single experience - an anecdote - here, JLTraveling's father* having a supervisor who was hired without having the qualifications for the job for which that person was hired, proves only that in this one instance procedures weren't followed. It's not evidence of anything else. It's one person's report of a relative's supervisor's qualifications, a decision made by an employer. A single occurrence.

*apologies if I have the exact relationship wrong

 

[eliza61]

I thought it was fine, but I do think there are new threats to address. I just don't think this is the way, FWIW. I believe the new system was in response to last year's Christmas attempt. The irony is it was reported the new system won't pick up the type of explosives that were used. The enhanced pat down would though.

I read an interesting article this morning.

TSA: New Scanners Kept Many Illegal or Dangerous Items Off Planes This Year

By Diane Macedo

Published November 18, 2010

"Airport passenger screening measures have become a touchy issue in the U.S. in the past week, but in the past year the controversial measures have detected more than 130 prohibited, illegal or dangerous items that otherwise would have made it onto airplanes, the Transportation Security Administration says."...

(That was over the past year.)

"...But in the future, he said, the TSA should "stop looking for bad objects or bad things and start looking for bad people."

..."The government has a lot of information on everyone who gets on a plane… so let’s integrate that intelligence into the checkpoint," he said. "Today the checkpoint is just looking for bad objects – like tweezers and shampoo, but the agent doesn’t know anything about the traveler."

With a quick background check, Lott said, agents could better assess the risk associated with each traveler, then use things like scanners and pat-downs to further analyze those deemed high risk."...


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/18/tsa-enhanced-imaging-kept-illegal-dangerous-items-plans-year/

This is so hysterically funny it borders on being a cartoon. Seriously? Can you really imagine the uproar if travelers had to allow any type of background check, Ocean? Really. I have a TWIC card and I can't imagine you even going through the application for that, let alone a background check.

 

[OceanAnnie]

This is so hysterically funny it borders on being a cartoon. Seriously? Can you really imagine the uproar if travelers had to allow any type of background check, Ocean? Really. I have a TWIC card and I can't imagine you even going through the application for that, let alone a background check.

What's so hysterically funny is that is the destination. Background check. Cross referencing. Doesn't matter what "I" think. That's the end goal.

ETA- The uproar over the new scans and enhanced pat downs were in effect dismissed. It would be interesting to see how another wave of uproar over this, would be handled. Something tells me, it would be treated much the same. There will be those in the public and government that would dismiss any uproar and accept it in the name of security.

 

[C.Ann]

Just so it's not misumderstood..I didn't say that one over the other was the receiving end...it's a 2 way street. I think anyone who is agravated by another should use the ignore.

Agreed.. It just needs to be taken someplace else because the turn it has taken is not really relevant to this particular thread..

I don't agree. The response I read was clarifying and explanatory. Again, a single experience - an anecdote - here, JLTraveling's father* having a supervisor who was hired without having the qualifications for the job for which that person was hired, proves only that in this one instance procedures weren't followed. It's not evidence of anything else. It's one person's report of a relative's supervisor's qualifications, a decision made by an employer. A single occurrence.

*apologies if I have the exact relationship wrong

Misunderstanding.. I wasn't commenting on your post..

 

[kaytieeldr]

Misunderstanding.. I wasn't commenting on your post..

Oh, I know. But I dispute wholeheartedly that the person JLTraveling thinks is attacking her intelligence is doing that. It's regrettable that she feels this way, but - bluntly - she's wrong. The other poster (I believe at work while this outrage against said poster is occurring, and so unable to respond) was simply attempting to clarify.

None of us has any knowledge of any others' levels of intelligence (well, except now JLTraveling's and mine now ) or comprehension. We can presume, based on some job descriptions, a certain degree of intelligence... although I do have a sibling once described by a teacher as an overachiever . Heck, bluntly, right now I'm a little confused about OceanAnnie's response to eliza61. I'm not exactly sure what she's saying, but I'm hesitant to ask

But I digress. Nobody was talking down to anyone.

 

[eliza61]

What's so hysterically funny is that is the destination. Background check. Cross referencing. Doesn't matter what "I" think. That's the end goal.

But you can hazard a very good guess on what you read and hear. NO mattter what you call it do you honestly believe in this country of over 300 million individuals that cross referencing is going to happen.

Look at the uproar in Arizona and the fall out over the immigration bill. last I heard every body from the federal government to the corn syrup association of America has got a lawsuit. they've got lawsuits piled up like airplanes ready to take off at JFK. They are now predicting it will be 20 years before the legal wrangling can even get straightened out. How many stories of police abuse did we get out of that story and of course the ever popular "Nazism" reference and potraying the state police asking every one for "Papers please". How many businesses cancelled planned meetings etc?

I'm willing to bet we'll have flying cars a'la George Jetson before the citizens of this country willing allow themselves to be "referenced or checked".

 

[OceanAnnie]

Oh, I know. But I dispute wholeheartedly that the person JLTraveling thinks is attacking her intelligence is doing that. It's regrettable that she feels this way, but - bluntly - she's wrong. The other poster (I believe at work while this outrage against said poster is occurring, and so unable to respond) was simply attempting to clarify.

None of us has any knowledge of any others' levels of intelligence (well, except now JLTraveling's and mine now ) or comprehension. We can presume, based on some job descriptions, a certain degree of intelligence... although I do have a sibling once described by a teacher as an overachiever . Heck, bluntly, right now I'm a little confused about OceanAnnie's response to eliza61. I'm not exactly sure what she's saying, but I'm hesitant to ask

But I digress. Nobody was talking down to anyone.

Don't be afraid.

I did edit my post. Not sure if it would clear anything up for you.
The background checks I referenced were in the article.

 

[C.Ann]

Oh, I know. But I dispute wholeheartedly that the person JLTraveling thinks is attacking her intelligence is doing that. It's regrettable that she feels this way, but - bluntly - she's wrong. The other poster (I believe at work while this outrage against said poster is occurring, and so unable to respond) was simply attempting to clarify.

None of us has any knowledge of any others' levels of intelligence (well, except now JLTraveling's and mine now ) or comprehension. We can presume, based on some job descriptions, a certain degree of intelligence... although I do have a sibling once described by a teacher as an overachiever . Heck, bluntly, right now I'm a little confused about OceanAnnie's response to eliza61. I'm not exactly sure what she's saying, but I'm hesitant to ask

But I digress. Nobody was talking down to anyone.

Okay - I think we're all a little confused now - because there's irrelevant stuff going on mixed in with the topic of this thread - so hopefully you and I are good - at least until we disagree on this thread again..LOL..

 

[OceanAnnie]

But you can hazard a very good guess on what you read and hear. NO mattter what you call it do you honestly believe in this country of over 300 million individuals that cross referencing is going to happen. Look at the uproar in Arizona and the fall out over the immigration bill. last I heard every body for the federal government to the corn syrup association of America has got a lawsuit. they've got lawsuits piled up like airplanes ready to take off at JFK. They are now predicting it will be 20 years before the legal wrangling can even get straightened out.

I'm willing to bet we'll have flying cars a'la George Jetson before the citizens of this country willing allow themselves to be "referenced or checked".

I'd hold on that bet if I were you.

The cross referencing is happening now to an extent. The lack of communication between agencies is what enabled the terrorist of 911. There has been work in that arena to rectify it.

It wasn't my idea. I didn't make it up. It was in the article.