TSA creator states we need to dismantle the TSA and privatize it!

[Sallow]

No thanks.

No more 9/11s. One was to much.

You do realize that it was the government that set the stage for 9-11 right? 9-11 happened shortly after it was announced that pilots could no longer carry firearms. What do you think would have happened if 19 people with box cutters were up against 2 pilots and crew with 9mm glocks with 14 bullets in the clip and 1 in the chamber? I will bet that things would have ended much differently.

But hey, praise Obama, he has done a great job thus far.

When the heck were American Commercial Pilots ever armed?

 

[MikeFrank]

No thanks.

No more 9/11s. One was to much.

You do realize that it was the government that set the stage for 9-11 right? 9-11 happened shortly after it was announced that pilots could no longer carry firearms. What do you think would have happened if 19 people with box cutters were up against 2 pilots and crew with 9mm glocks with 14 bullets in the clip and 1 in the chamber? I will bet that things would have ended much differently.

But hey, praise Obama, he has done a great job thus far.

The government did not have anything to do with 9/11. Have you forgotten that it was a second attack on the WTC by the same ring of criminals? It was planned years in advance.

I said they set the stage, I didn't say they did it. I was very clear THIS WAS WHAT GOVERNMENT DID AND I QUOTE AGAIN "9-11 happened shortly after it was announced that pilots could no longer carry firearms.


Now hence my next statement : "What do you think would have happened if 19 people with box cutters were up against 2 pilots and crew with 9mm glocks with 14 bullets in the clip and 1 in the chamber? I will bet that things would have ended much differently.


The government BANNED pilots from being able to carry any firearm whatsoever, please tell me that if pilots were still able to be armed on a plane if a few people per plane with box cutters would have a different outcome?

 

[Wiseacre]

Haven't most foreign countries privatized their air travel security? I'd be okay with letting the airline companies take care of their own security. If it was me I'd make sure nobody could get into the pilot cabin, and they could have surveillance cameras to immediately see any disturbances in the passenger area and take the appropriate actions. If the pilot needs to pee? Give 'em an empty coffee can.

 

[uscitizen]

No thanks.

No more 9/11s. One was to much.

You do realize that it was the government that set the stage for 9-11 right? 9-11 happened shortly after it was announced that pilots could no longer carry firearms. What do you think would have happened if 19 people with box cutters were up against 2 pilots and crew with 9mm glocks with 14 bullets in the clip and 1 in the chamber? I will bet that things would have ended much differently.

But hey, praise Obama, he has done a great job thus far.

Let us not forget the pilot who shot a hole in his airplane.

 

[Sallow]

Haven't most foreign countries privatized their air travel security? I'd be okay with letting the airline companies take care of their own security. If it was me I'd make sure nobody could get into the pilot cabin, and they could have surveillance cameras to immediately see any disturbances in the passenger area and take the appropriate actions. If the pilot needs to pee? Give 'em an empty coffee can.

You travel at all?

In most countries I go to..it's the government that's in charge of security.

 

[flacaltenn]

Which would be a very stupid thing to do.

In what manner? The airlines woulod be responsble for protecting it's passengers, they can be sued and would do a much better job that our government.

An industry self-policing?

That's never worked out.

Really? wanna compare lives saved between Underwriters Lab and the govt CPSC?

Maybe jealous that State Farm beat the NTSA to the Ford/Firestone prob by 2 years?

Who gets punished when the elevator crashes? The bureaucratic techy inspector whose name was in the elevator?

Think Consumer Reports is less important than the Govt Printing Office?

Let's see what has a larger effect on driving safety, the DMV licensing process or your insurance company?

You're right -- no natural restrictions on how completely screwed we'd be without massive bureaucratic superheroes like the Div. of Mining who closed Massey coal down 14 times but allowed them to continue and kill a couple dozen miners anyway..

Sorry -- I was filling out City/County bureaucratic bullshit all day and was just in the mood to dump on that..

 

[MikeFrank]

Haven't most foreign countries privatized their air travel security? I'd be okay with letting the airline companies take care of their own security. If it was me I'd make sure nobody could get into the pilot cabin, and they could have surveillance cameras to immediately see any disturbances in the passenger area and take the appropriate actions. If the pilot needs to pee? Give 'em an empty coffee can.

You travel at all?

In most countries I go to..it's the government that's in charge of security.

wow, never any substance from you. Let me ask you this, who do you think is the security for armored cars, the government? If the government was so great at security why wouldn't all armored cars have government as their security? Wouldn't the banks demand government secure their money rather than a private armored car company or is it that armored car services have a better track record than government at high level security?

I can't wait to hear your response.

 

[MikeFrank]

No thanks.

No more 9/11s. One was to much.

You do realize that it was the government that set the stage for 9-11 right? 9-11 happened shortly after it was announced that pilots could no longer carry firearms. What do you think would have happened if 19 people with box cutters were up against 2 pilots and crew with 9mm glocks with 14 bullets in the clip and 1 in the chamber? I will bet that things would have ended much differently.

But hey, praise Obama, he has done a great job thus far.

When the heck were American Commercial Pilots ever armed?

Up until July 2001 - ONLY 2 fucking months before 9-11 happened, why don't you do some research for a change? wake the fuck up! THEY the goverment SET THE STAGE! Who is going to win here a few people with fucking box cutters or 2 or 3 pilots and some crew with semi automatic weapons? First rule, NEVER BRING A KNIFE TO A GUN FIGHT, it is a losing battle!

Sorry folks you all know I don't use this type of language, but this person is really starting to piss me off with their ignorance, no wonder this country is in so much trouble!

 

[cutter]

I worked for TSA for 5yrs and have a couple observations. At the beginning TSA Leaders were mostly ex-military. The supervisor at my airport was a ex military police NCO. The Asst. Frd. Security Director was a Gunnery Sargent and the FSD was an retired army Major. The thing that made this good was all these people were used to having authority and it didn't go to their heads. In the 5yrs I was there political correctness and favoritism took over. People with NO job experience were put in all kinds of authority positions. A supervisor who had only been a private security guard. Leads that were promoted because they were blond and dating the supervisor. These new people had one thing in common, the position went to their heads. They had power and could force people to do things for no reason other that to make them miserable. Send people to extra screening because they commented on security procedures, send obese people to have a pat down as a joke on the screener doing the pat down searches. The supervisors would play favorites in scheduling when they were supposed to give senior employees first choice. Now it's like a bunch of poorly educated, inexperienced people with swelled heads and some power. Gone are the good ex military professionals that knew how to handle authority. I quit 2yrs ago, i couldn't stand what it had become. It needs to be disbanded and security turned over to the airlines, they have people in planes and it gives them a reason to be thorough.

 

[Wiseacre]

Haven't most foreign countries privatized their air travel security? I'd be okay with letting the airline companies take care of their own security. If it was me I'd make sure nobody could get into the pilot cabin, and they could have surveillance cameras to immediately see any disturbances in the passenger area and take the appropriate actions. If the pilot needs to pee? Give 'em an empty coffee can.

You travel at all?

In most countries I go to..it's the government that's in charge of security.

I haven't left the US in more than 20 years, don't intend to either. Not that it makes any difference to this discussion anyway. Below is a snippet from a piece done back in July 2006 from Heritage.org.


Four years of experience have taught that the U.S. government cannot do the job any better than the private sector. This should come as no surprise. Virtually every other country that has used government screeners has reached the same conclusion. When countries first tried to thwart airplane hijacking in the 1970s, most nations initially used government employees to beef up airport security through a government transportation or justice agency.
Beginning in the 1980s, European airports began to develop a performance-contracting model under which the government set and enforced high performance standards, which airports then carried out by hiring security companies or occasionally using their own staff. Belgium was the first to adopt this model in 1982, followed by the Netherlands in 1983 and the United Kingdom in 1987. The 1990s saw a new wave of conversions to the public-private partnership model, with Germany switching in 1992, France in 1993, Austria and Denmark in 1994, Ireland and Poland in 1998, and Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Switzerland in 1999.
In 2001, the GAO examined the security screening practices of Canada, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.[8] Its report focused on the superior performance of the European airports, all of which use the performance-contracting model. The GAO reported four areas of significant differences between U.S. and European screening practices at the time:
Better overall security system design (e.g., allowing only ticketed passengers past screening and stationing law enforcement personnel at or near checkpoints);
Higher qualifications and training requirements for screeners (e.g., 60 hours in France versus 12 hours as then required by the Federal Aviation Administration in the United States);
Better pay and benefits, resulting in much lower turnover rates; and
Screening responsibility lodged with the airport or national government, not with airlines.
When Congress passed the ATSA, it ignored the fact that, as a result of high standards and government monitoring, nearly every European airport had adopted performance contracting over the past two decades. Israel and a number of nations in the Caribbean and the Far East also use this model. No country has emulated the United States and had its national government take over the actual operation of its passenger-screening system.

Time to Rethink Airport Security

 

[Sallow]

Haven't most foreign countries privatized their air travel security? I'd be okay with letting the airline companies take care of their own security. If it was me I'd make sure nobody could get into the pilot cabin, and they could have surveillance cameras to immediately see any disturbances in the passenger area and take the appropriate actions. If the pilot needs to pee? Give 'em an empty coffee can.

You travel at all?

In most countries I go to..it's the government that's in charge of security.

wow, never any substance from you. Let me ask you this, who do you think is the security for armored cars, the government? If the government was so great at security why wouldn't all armored cars have government as their security? Wouldn't the banks demand government secure their money rather than a private armored car company or is it that armored car services have a better track record than government at high level security?

I can't wait to hear your response.

You're kidding..right?

 

[Sallow]

Haven't most foreign countries privatized their air travel security? I'd be okay with letting the airline companies take care of their own security. If it was me I'd make sure nobody could get into the pilot cabin, and they could have surveillance cameras to immediately see any disturbances in the passenger area and take the appropriate actions. If the pilot needs to pee? Give 'em an empty coffee can.

You travel at all?

In most countries I go to..it's the government that's in charge of security.

I haven't left the US in more than 20 years, don't intend to either. Not that it makes any difference to this discussion anyway. Below is a snippet from a piece done back in July 2006 from Heritage.org.


Four years of experience have taught that the U.S. government cannot do the job any better than the private sector. This should come as no surprise. Virtually every other country that has used government screeners has reached the same conclusion. When countries first tried to thwart airplane hijacking in the 1970s, most nations initially used government employees to beef up airport security through a government transportation or justice agency.
Beginning in the 1980s, European airports began to develop a performance-contracting model under which the government set and enforced high performance standards, which airports then carried out by hiring security companies or occasionally using their own staff. Belgium was the first to adopt this model in 1982, followed by the Netherlands in 1983 and the United Kingdom in 1987. The 1990s saw a new wave of conversions to the public-private partnership model, with Germany switching in 1992, France in 1993, Austria and Denmark in 1994, Ireland and Poland in 1998, and Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Switzerland in 1999.
In 2001, the GAO examined the security screening practices of Canada, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.[8] Its report focused on the superior performance of the European airports, all of which use the performance-contracting model. The GAO reported four areas of significant differences between U.S. and European screening practices at the time:
Better overall security system design (e.g., allowing only ticketed passengers past screening and stationing law enforcement personnel at or near checkpoints);
Higher qualifications and training requirements for screeners (e.g., 60 hours in France versus 12 hours as then required by the Federal Aviation Administration in the United States);
Better pay and benefits, resulting in much lower turnover rates; and
Screening responsibility lodged with the airport or national government, not with airlines.
When Congress passed the ATSA, it ignored the fact that, as a result of high standards and government monitoring, nearly every European airport had adopted performance contracting over the past two decades. Israel and a number of nations in the Caribbean and the Far East also use this model. No country has emulated the United States and had its national government take over the actual operation of its passenger-screening system.

Time to Rethink Airport Security

Having been to most of the countries you mentioned in your post..I've seen police at every airport overseas at least handling one of the checkpoints.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Which would be a very stupid thing to do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Haven't most foreign countries privatized their air travel security? I'd be okay with letting the airline companies take care of their own security. If it was me I'd make sure nobody could get into the pilot cabin, and they could have surveillance cameras to immediately see any disturbances in the passenger area and take the appropriate actions. If the pilot needs to pee? Give 'em an empty coffee can.

You travel at all?

In most countries I go to..it's the government that's in charge of security.

In most countries you go to they can arrest you for saying you hate Christians.

 

[flacaltenn]

The big diff is who's paying for it.

I see no reason that the air travelers who benefit from the security shouldn't be paying for it.
Why should folks who fly once a decade have to pay thru taxes..

Let those frequent flyers pay Delta for the screenings. The govt reserves the right to have an entire battalion of marines present if they so choose..

 

[Sallow]

Haven't most foreign countries privatized their air travel security? I'd be okay with letting the airline companies take care of their own security. If it was me I'd make sure nobody could get into the pilot cabin, and they could have surveillance cameras to immediately see any disturbances in the passenger area and take the appropriate actions. If the pilot needs to pee? Give 'em an empty coffee can.

You travel at all?

In most countries I go to..it's the government that's in charge of security.

In most countries you go to they can arrest you for saying you hate Christians.

Really?

Point them out.

 

[Ravi]

The big diff is who's paying for it.

I see no reason that the air travelers who benefit from the security shouldn't be paying for it.
Why should folks who fly once a decade have to pay thru taxes..

Let those frequent flyers pay Delta for the screenings. The govt reserves the right to have an entire battalion of marines present if they so choose..

You're mind might be a little fuzzy, but in the past hijackers used planes to kill a few thousand people on the ground.

The security isn't just for the people on the planes.

 

[JoeB131]

The stupidity of the TSA is that they feel the need to grope and hassle everyone.

No, no, we aren't going to just hassle the guy with the middle eastern name. That would be PROFILING, even though they've been responsible for nearly every act terror since the 70's. Nope, we got to grope granny's colostomy bag because hey, we don't want to offend the ACLU.

The thing is, Al Qaeda would never try to pull that again. Before 9/11, hijackers just kept passengers until they got some demand met. So you stayed cool during a hijacking because, hey, you'd probably survive.

Today, a hijacker would be beaten to death by the other passengers. Heck, they scambled F-16s because some clowns tried to get some nookie in the bathroom on an airliner.

So we are spending 9 billion closing off a door they'll never try to use again.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The big diff is who's paying for it.

I see no reason that the air travelers who benefit from the security shouldn't be paying for it.
Why should folks who fly once a decade have to pay thru taxes..

Let those frequent flyers pay Delta for the screenings. The govt reserves the right to have an entire battalion of marines present if they so choose..

You're mind might be a little fuzzy, but in the past hijackers used planes to kill a few thousand people on the ground.

The security isn't just for the people on the planes.

Funny how you are so willing to defend the TSA yet never weigh in about the defense budget.

 

[flacaltenn]

The big diff is who's paying for it.

I see no reason that the air travelers who benefit from the security shouldn't be paying for it.
Why should folks who fly once a decade have to pay thru taxes..

Let those frequent flyers pay Delta for the screenings. The govt reserves the right to have an entire battalion of marines present if they so choose..

You're mind might be a little fuzzy, but in the past hijackers used planes to kill a few thousand people on the ground.

The security isn't just for the people on the planes.

Not fuzzy at all Ravi.. In fact, I seem to remember that the omnipotent zero-defects govt bureaucracy you worship actually renewed the VISAs of Mohammed Attah and other militants months AFTER they flew those planes into buildings..

Gee -- how'd that happen? Think maybe THAT still isn't fixed? You feel secure with Barney Fife in charge?

((Yeah, Yeah, I know the stamp on the docs show July 2001, but they weren't actually SENT OUT until Feb 2002. )) That's the EFFICIENCY that you love evidently.