The TSA...

[Woodruff]

I don't get why people get all worked up about the TSA. They are doing their job. You don't have to fly. They make reasonable accommodations for everything, including private screenings and the ability to declare stuff for medical conditions, etc.

Because all of this invasion of privacy is way over the top. Furthermore, the TSA is a monopoly because Congress has legislated that private security firms can't be used to provide the same security. If private security firms were used, the airlines/airport could replace them with different companies if there were the same complaints as have been leveled against the TSA. Plus, the TSA is unionized, so they're probably protected in their jobs even if they're complete jerks to the customers.

Leave it to Night Strike to make it a "union thing" instead of a "Constitution thing".

[Night Strike]

I don't get why people get all worked up about the TSA. They are doing their job. You don't have to fly. They make reasonable accommodations for everything, including private screenings and the ability to declare stuff for medical conditions, etc.

Because all of this invasion of privacy is way over the top. Furthermore, the TSA is a monopoly because Congress has legislated that private security firms can't be used to provide the same security. If private security firms were used, the airlines/airport could replace them with different companies if there were the same complaints as have been leveled against the TSA. Plus, the TSA is unionized, so they're probably protected in their jobs even if they're complete jerks to the customers.

Leave it to Night Strike to make it a "union thing" instead of a "Constitution thing".

It's both. Except the complete lack of customer service has nothing to do with the Constitution.

[kentington]

I don't get why people get all worked up about the TSA. They are doing their job. You don't have to fly. They make reasonable accommodations for everything, including private screenings and the ability to declare stuff for medical conditions, etc.

Because all of this invasion of privacy is way over the top. Furthermore, the TSA is a monopoly because Congress has legislated that private security firms can't be used to provide the same security. If private security firms were used, the airlines/airport could replace them with different companies if there were the same complaints as have been leveled against the TSA. Plus, the TSA is unionized, so they're probably protected in their jobs even if they're complete jerks to the customers.

Leave it to Night Strike to make it a "union thing" instead of a "Constitution thing".

I would say that in this situation one doesn't necessarily exclude the other. You can have both the government violating your Constitutional rights and have them doing it rudely because of a lack of customer service. The lack of customer service could be the results of other things though, like having people give you dirty looks, excuses, and hating you for violating their rights all day. Those kinds of things can wear on a person quickly.

[Woodruff]

I don't get why people get all worked up about the TSA. They are doing their job. You don't have to fly. They make reasonable accommodations for everything, including private screenings and the ability to declare stuff for medical conditions, etc.

Because all of this invasion of privacy is way over the top. Furthermore, the TSA is a monopoly because Congress has legislated that private security firms can't be used to provide the same security. If private security firms were used, the airlines/airport could replace them with different companies if there were the same complaints as have been leveled against the TSA. Plus, the TSA is unionized, so they're probably protected in their jobs even if they're complete jerks to the customers.

Leave it to Night Strike to make it a "union thing" instead of a "Constitution thing".

It's both. Except the complete lack of customer service has nothing to do with the Constitution.

That must be why you so thoroughly discussed how it was against the Constitution. I wondered.

[patches70]

I go to the casinos fairly often. The closest one to me is in West Virginia, the Hollywood Casino and Racetrack. One of the largest (if not the largest) casino's in the East.

There is a lot of cash at casinos, an insane amount (as I'm sure people would imagine), there is also an absolute TON of security.

Private security.

I am assured that the moment I walk into the casino and every second I'm there, I'm watched, except maybe in the bathroom (yikes!).

I even see the security people walking around. They are all quite nice in my many experiences. Always smile, always nod and answer questions if I have them. I know also that what I see is only the tip of iceberg in terms of security.

What I don't see is even the tiniest bit of action to hinder me in anyway as I make my way through table games and poker tables. (I don't play slots much at all). I mean, there isn't anything I ever do to bring even the slightest suspicion upon me at all. I have no nefarious ends. And as such, the security at the Hollywood Casino is smart enough, or trained enough, to recognize that I am not one they need to worry about. Even so, they keep their eye on me regardless, without me ever being hindered or even aware (if I chose not to be aware).

The TSA, on the other hand, are not so gifted in the art of security. Where as the private security force that monitors a place that has literally thousands of people in it at every hour of the day and night and 10's if not 100's of million of dollars (in cash!) floating around, are able to keep me (and my money!) safe.

The moment I walk into an airport, even though I am exactly the same manner, appearance and just cause to be in it (like the casino), because the TSA is incompetent they must assume I am up to no good. Therefore I am hindered, treated unfairly and forced into inconvenience.
The casino, though their need for security is great, know that this is bad for business. If their security treated the people visiting their facility as the TSA treats people who are simply trying to move about the country (legally!), the casino would soon go out of business.
The TSA doesn't care about business. They don't care if people are unjustly hindered, harassed or inconvenienced. You are just another potential evildoer, evidence not required.


There was a Senator, I don't remember the name, who was sitting on a Congressional panel with oversight of the TSA. A TSA official was told by the Senator- "If you take ten thousand people, put one bomb on one of their person, I'll bet you my single bomb sniffing dog will find that bomb before your hundred agents and your full body scanners do."

The Senator is right. Airport security can be done effectively, cheaper, and without making ever person who walks into an airport feel like a criminal. But the TSA are not the people to do that job. The TSA only knows how to use a hammer when it's a scalpel that's needed.

[72o]

I do not work for the TSA, I am not taking their side. However, the casino analogy isn't the same thing. The private security is only concerned about protecting the money inside the casino, not about the safety of the patrons.

The simple fact is, the TSA got to be so intrusive out of necessity, when terrorists realized that there was a distinct lack of precautions in airports. If terrorists started blowing up casinos, football games, concerts, or other large gatherings of people, you can be sure that private security would be a lot more intrusive than they are in your West Virginia casino today. It's a knee-jerk reaction, yes, but what is your alternative?

I'd rather the TSA be dicks to everyone else around me, while I follow the guidelines and breeze on through, and feel secure when I get on an airplane, than have this lady's colostomy bag never see the light of day because they're trying to be too concerned for her feelings, and roll the proverbial intensity cubes every time I travel.

[patches70]

The private security is only concerned about protecting the money inside the casino, not about the safety of the patrons.

That's their only concern, eh? Tell me, where does the casino get it's money if not for patrons who are safe to come in and plunk down their kids college fund?

Or course patron safety is very important to the casino. Without the patrons there is no casino.

The simple fact is, the TSA got to be so intrusive out of necessity, when terrorists realized that there was a distinct lack of precautions in airports. If terrorists started blowing up casinos, football games, concerts, or other large gatherings of people, you can be sure that private security would be a lot more intrusive than they are in your West Virginia casino today. It's a knee-jerk reaction, yes, but what is your alternative?

For all the TSA's efforts, no US airport is anywhere near the best rated security. The best rated airport? Narita (emphasis mine)-

Narita International Airport achieved success at the World Airport Awards, winning the award for the World's Best Airport Security Processing. The Awards were held at Passenger Terminal EXPO in Vienna.

"We offer our congratulations to Narita International Airport on winning this prestigious award. With increased security checks and processes being implemented globally this is not always an area of service where passenger satisfaction is expected. From the survey feedback we found that customers at Narita International Airport were particularly impressed with the quality and courtesy of the staff service, as well as the organisation of the security processing." said Edward Plaisted, Chairman of SKYTRAX.

The Airport Security Processing items in the customer survey covered waiting times and queuing systems, to the overall attitude and friendliness of staff, through to the customer's perceived efficiency of the Security Processing service.

Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport (winner of this title in 2011) took 2nd place this year, with Incheon International Airport in 3rd. Again, in another all Asian category, Beijing Capital International Airport was voted 4th with Tokyo Haneda Airport completing the top-5.


The TSA don't need to be a bunch of goons. It's all show anyway, you think the TSA patting down little old ladies in wheelchairs makes you safer. Ha!
It's all about perception, you even said so yourself-

and feel secure when I get on an airplane

I'd rather the TSA be dicks to everyone else around me,

Why? Does it make you feel better seeing the TSA being dicks? God forbid, a law abiding citizen from a foreign country, their first impression of the United States upon visiting for the first time is the TSA of which you'll be glad the visitors are treated badly? Jesus Christ man.

and roll the proverbial intensity cubes every time I travel.

You should probably just take a bus if flying gets you that nervous because you think a little old lady with a colostomy bag is going to blow you to bits. Sheesh.....

You don't treat people like garbage just because your scared out of your wits. It's not rational.

[BigBallinStalin]

I don't get why people get all worked up about the TSA. They are doing their job. You don't have to fly. They make reasonable accommodations for everything, including private screenings and the ability to declare stuff for medical conditions, etc.

This stupid woman didn't take advantage of those accommodations, and then goes on TV about it. She tried to stuff a bunch of liquid ("soft foods") in her carry-on and didn't think that would be a problem? So you got a little embarrassed in front of strangers because of your colostomy bag or whatever. Deal with it. It certainly won't be the first or the last time.

I have brown skin and an impossible to pronounce name. I fly at least 4 segments a month. I get "randomly" searched a LOT. I do not mind it. I have nothing to hide. I hate the slow people that aren't prepared to go through security efficiently WAY more than I hate security.

Because that bureaucracy isn't necessary; they face no profit-and-loss incentive when violating people's sense of privacy; most of their staff is unprofessional and seemingly are used as a form of ineffective fiscal policy; TSA is mostly security theatre; they haven't caught a single terrorist; they spend millions and are inefficient; some of them are unnecessarily abusive, and some are power trippers; there's no effective mechanism to correct for this because their costs are externalized (i.e. people take their shit and have to deal with it because Security Theater); etc.

You're being taxed for the illusion of security.

[patches70]

[
You're being taxed for the illusion of security.

This.

[Woodruff]

I go to the casinos fairly often. The closest one to me is in West Virginia, the Hollywood Casino and Racetrack. One of the largest (if not the largest) casino's in the East.

Excellent example, patches!

The moment I walk into an airport, even though I am exactly the same manner, appearance and just cause to be in it (like the casino), because the TSA is incompetent they must assume I am up to no good. Therefore I am hindered, treated unfairly and forced into inconvenience.

The thing is, the casino security folks may just as well assume you're up to no good (that's sort of what security does), but they don't take that as cause to create a problem for you (unlike the TSA). Rather, they treat you well until such action is warranted.

The Senator is right. Airport security can be done effectively, cheaper, and without making ever person who walks into an airport feel like a criminal. But the TSA are not the people to do that job. The TSA only knows how to use a hammer when it's a scalpel that's needed.

Yep. The Israelis, for one, have much more effective airport security methods in a far more dangerous security situation.

[Woodruff]

I do not work for the TSA, I am not taking their side. However, the casino analogy isn't the same thing. The private security is only concerned about protecting the money inside the casino, not about the safety of the patrons.

That is absolutely not true.

The simple fact is, the TSA got to be so intrusive out of necessity

What is the necessity? I'm being serious here...what is the necessity for these intrusions and why do the security functions in places like Israel not have those necessities?

when terrorists realized that there was a distinct lack of precautions in airports.

That's the problem exactly...there ARE STILL a distinct lack of precautions in airports. It has been shown time and time again that the security procedures used in American airports are not effective. It's all about the APPEARANCE of security, and they're not very good at that if you're paying attention.

[72o]

Who would have thought that the best security lines would be in countries where the culture dictates that people be efficient, mild-mannered, well-behaved, etc. etc.?

That's not racism, it's a stereotype.

[kentington]

I go to the casinos fairly often. The closest one to me is in West Virginia, the Hollywood Casino and Racetrack. One of the largest (if not the largest) casino's in the East.

Excellent example, patches!

The moment I walk into an airport, even though I am exactly the same manner, appearance and just cause to be in it (like the casino), because the TSA is incompetent they must assume I am up to no good. Therefore I am hindered, treated unfairly and forced into inconvenience.

The thing is, the casino security folks may just as well assume you're up to no good (that's sort of what security does), but they don't take that as cause to create a problem for you (unlike the TSA). Rather, they treat you well until such action is warranted.

The Senator is right. Airport security can be done effectively, cheaper, and without making ever person who walks into an airport feel like a criminal. But the TSA are not the people to do that job. The TSA only knows how to use a hammer when it's a scalpel that's needed.

Yep. The Israelis, for one, have much more effective airport security methods in a far more dangerous security situation.

I agree with the analogy as well.

So solution-wise, you proposed breaking it up into smaller groups. How would this help? How do you see smaller groups as being more effective? Do you see it being effective while being run by the government?

[Woodruff]

Who would have thought that the best security lines would be in countries where the culture dictates that people be efficient, mild-mannered, well-behaved, etc. etc.?

That's not racism, it's a stereotype.

It also has nothing at all to do with security.

[Woodruff]

I go to the casinos fairly often. The closest one to me is in West Virginia, the Hollywood Casino and Racetrack. One of the largest (if not the largest) casino's in the East.

Excellent example, patches!

The moment I walk into an airport, even though I am exactly the same manner, appearance and just cause to be in it (like the casino), because the TSA is incompetent they must assume I am up to no good. Therefore I am hindered, treated unfairly and forced into inconvenience.

The thing is, the casino security folks may just as well assume you're up to no good (that's sort of what security does), but they don't take that as cause to create a problem for you (unlike the TSA). Rather, they treat you well until such action is warranted.

The Senator is right. Airport security can be done effectively, cheaper, and without making ever person who walks into an airport feel like a criminal. But the TSA are not the people to do that job. The TSA only knows how to use a hammer when it's a scalpel that's needed.

Yep. The Israelis, for one, have much more effective airport security methods in a far more dangerous security situation.

I agree with the analogy as well.

So solution-wise, you proposed breaking it up into smaller groups. How would this help? How do you see smaller groups as being more effective? Do you see it being effective while being run by the government?

No, not while being run by the government. Competing entities. I'm absolutely not one of those "the market takes care of everything" bozos like BigBallinStalin, but it would definitely make a big difference in this situation to have that competition.

[kentington]

I go to the casinos fairly often. The closest one to me is in West Virginia, the Hollywood Casino and Racetrack. One of the largest (if not the largest) casino's in the East.

Excellent example, patches!

The moment I walk into an airport, even though I am exactly the same manner, appearance and just cause to be in it (like the casino), because the TSA is incompetent they must assume I am up to no good. Therefore I am hindered, treated unfairly and forced into inconvenience.

The thing is, the casino security folks may just as well assume you're up to no good (that's sort of what security does), but they don't take that as cause to create a problem for you (unlike the TSA). Rather, they treat you well until such action is warranted.

The Senator is right. Airport security can be done effectively, cheaper, and without making ever person who walks into an airport feel like a criminal. But the TSA are not the people to do that job. The TSA only knows how to use a hammer when it's a scalpel that's needed.

Yep. The Israelis, for one, have much more effective airport security methods in a far more dangerous security situation.

I agree with the analogy as well.

So solution-wise, you proposed breaking it up into smaller groups. How would this help? How do you see smaller groups as being more effective? Do you see it being effective while being run by the government?

No, not while being run by the government. Competing entities. I'm absolutely not one of those "the market takes care of everything" bozos like BigBallinStalin, but it would definitely make a big difference in this situation to have that competition.

I missed that part. Ok yeah I fully support competition. After all that is what keeps us here in OT and on a Risk site in general. We love and thrive on competition.
I also don't think BBS is a bozo. I don't always agree with him, but I do believe he has things moving around upstairs.

[BigBallinStalin]

They keep dropping the furniture though, and no matter how many times I shout at them to be quiet, people always give me weird looks. It can be frustrating.

[Woodruff]

Excellent article on the futility of TSA procedures:
http://m.vanityfair.com/culture/feature ... ity-201112

[Symmetry]

It's theatre pure and simple. Let's pretend that a terrorist can't get through- security theatre for the terrorists and the general public.

[thegreekdog]

It's theatre pure and simple. Let's pretend that a terrorist can't get through- security theatre for the terrorists and the general public.

If the general public doesn't enjoy the security theater, why would the government still put on the security theater show?

[Symmetry]

It's theatre pure and simple. Let's pretend that a terrorist can't get through- security theatre for the terrorists and the general public.

If the general public doesn't enjoy the security theater, why would the government still put on the security theater show?

Why wouldn't the general public enjoy the illusion?

[thegreekdog]

It's theatre pure and simple. Let's pretend that a terrorist can't get through- security theatre for the terrorists and the general public.

If the general public doesn't enjoy the security theater, why would the government still put on the security theater show?

Why wouldn't the general public enjoy the illusion?

They don't seem to be enjoying the illusion.

[Symmetry]

It's theatre pure and simple. Let's pretend that a terrorist can't get through- security theatre for the terrorists and the general public.

If the general public doesn't enjoy the security theater, why would the government still put on the security theater show?

Why wouldn't the general public enjoy the illusion?

They don't seem to be enjoying the illusion.

Fair point, I should restate. That the theatrics are in place is generally popular whether or not they are actually effective.

[thegreekdog]

It's theatre pure and simple. Let's pretend that a terrorist can't get through- security theatre for the terrorists and the general public.

If the general public doesn't enjoy the security theater, why would the government still put on the security theater show?

Why wouldn't the general public enjoy the illusion?

They don't seem to be enjoying the illusion.

Fair point, I should restate. That the theatrics are in place is generally popular whether or not they are actually effective.

I think for the most part, yes. In this instance, I'm not sure.

[Symmetry]

Which kind of gets to one of the core points of my personal philosophy- if it's popular, but ineffective, are we dealing with theatrics or realism?