Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
TSA Issues: A Combined List >

TSA Issues: A Combined List

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

TSA Issues: A Combined List

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-16-2010 | 11:55 PM
  #111  
Ref +8
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
From: North by Midwest
Default

Originally Posted by Cargo Man
This is news to me. An Airport can "opt-out" of TSA services and hire thier own security.
Amid airport anger, GOP takes aim at screening | Washington Examiner
I use to be a airport PD LEO, I've been saying for years that TSA needs to be revamped into an oversight agency and that the airport security needs to be under the charge of the municipal, county and state controlling agencies. Whenever TSA has trouble or wants to press charges the charging agency is always either the Airport PD or the County Sheriff, I say eliminate the federal BS and let the Airport Authority PD deal with it. It would be cheaper, more efficiently run and best of all no federal BS, TSA needs to be downgraded to a supervisory agency and not the controlling one.

Last edited by flywithjohn; 11-16-2010 at 11:57 PM. Reason: Typing errors
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 01:47 AM
  #112  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
From: emb-145 ca
Default

Originally Posted by N9373M
I agree, to a point. If the undie bomber took down the jet, would your thoughts change?

All this 4th amendment stuff is good, until we lose an aircraft.

It's a tough call.
No. It's NOT a tough call. I would rather get blown up than live in police state where 5 year olds get molested as a matter of security policy. Where a government can order you to either risk increasing your chances of developing cancer, or face getting hand-raped.

All in the name of "security." All to stop terrorists from "succeeding."

How much freedom and liberty do we have to lose before the terrorists have, in fact, won their victory? How much money can we really spend to fight them? For every $1 the jihadists spend, we probably spend $10,000 to fight/slow/stop/disrupt them. When we have spent ourselves into so much debt that we have no way and no hope to repay it, how secure are we then?

The U.S. military operation in Afghanistan annually costs the U.S. around 6 times that nation's ENTIRE economy. If the U.S. had simply given all that money directly to the Afghan people, the standard of living of those people would have been six times higher than it is (if you could keep corruption under control). How interested in global jihad would those people be if they had a life that was 6 times more comfortable than what they have now?

We are fools. Osama is sitting around his warm campfire talking with his buddies right now. They are drinking tea and telling stories about how in only 10 short years they got Americans to rip out their own souls with their own hands and strangle them dead in front of their own children-- souls that long ago valued liberty above all else, even our own lives.They are laughing at us. They should be.

We are fools.

Last edited by CaptainNameless; 11-17-2010 at 02:04 AM.
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 02:30 AM
  #113  
Line Holder
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Default

Amen. UBL said he would bankrupt us (as his people did the Russians in Afghanistan the 80's), and he is well on his way to success. He has also changed our psyche...we used to pride ourselves on independence and self-reliance. Now we cringe before governmental thuggery, not just the TSA, but in many, many other ways. Sad, UBL is winning, hands down. Sam

Last edited by Semaphore Sam; 11-17-2010 at 02:31 AM. Reason: grammer mistake
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 04:34 AM
  #114  
captnmajic
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Originally Posted by Semaphore Sam
Amen. UBL said he would bankrupt us (as his people did the Russians in Afghanistan the 80's), and he is well on his way to success. He has also changed our psyche...we used to pride ourselves on independence and self-reliance. Now we cringe before governmental thuggery, not just the TSA, but in many, many other ways. Sad, UBL is winning, hands down. Sam
No sir.....UBL HAS WON.....unless we wise up and turn this crazy train around.
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 05:33 AM
  #115  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
From: A-320/A
Default

Originally Posted by CaptainNameless
No. It's NOT a tough call. I would rather get blown up than live in police state where 5 year olds get molested as a matter of security policy. Where a government can order you to either risk increasing your chances of developing cancer, or face getting hand-raped.

All in the name of "security." All to stop terrorists from "succeeding."

How much freedom and liberty do we have to lose before the terrorists have, in fact, won their victory? How much money can we really spend to fight them? For every $1 the jihadists spend, we probably spend $10,000 to fight/slow/stop/disrupt them. When we have spent ourselves into so much debt that we have no way and no hope to repay it, how secure are we then?

The U.S. military operation in Afghanistan annually costs the U.S. around 6 times that nation's ENTIRE economy. If the U.S. had simply given all that money directly to the Afghan people, the standard of living of those people would have been six times higher than it is (if you could keep corruption under control). How interested in global jihad would those people be if they had a life that was 6 times more comfortable than what they have now?

We are fools. Osama is sitting around his warm campfire talking with his buddies right now. They are drinking tea and telling stories about how in only 10 short years they got Americans to rip out their own souls with their own hands and strangle them dead in front of their own children-- souls that long ago valued liberty above all else, even our own lives.They are laughing at us. They should be.

We are fools.
+1. Sadly, and reluctantly, I have to agree. I forget which of America's patriarchs was quoted "...those who exchange personal liberty for security, deserve neither..." That man was a prophet.

Chuck
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 05:46 AM
  #116  
dragon's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 0
From: Dismayed
Default

Originally Posted by chuck416
+1. Sadly, and reluctantly, I have to agree. I forget which of America's patriarchs was quoted "...those who exchange personal liberty for security, deserve neither..." That man was a prophet.

Chuck
It was Ben Franklin.

This farce must end. Profile for Pete's sake. If it looks like terrorist or is acting oddly, screen it!

Seeing numerous reports that the traveling public may have finally had it. `Fed Up' Passengers, Unions Balk at Airports' Wider Use of Full-Body Scans - Bloomberg
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 06:30 AM
  #117  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,545
Likes: 285
Default

Originally Posted by flywithjohn
I use to be a airport PD LEO, I've been saying for years that TSA needs to be revamped into an oversight agency and that the airport security needs to be under the charge of the municipal, county and state controlling agencies. Whenever TSA has trouble or wants to press charges the charging agency is always either the Airport PD or the County Sheriff, I say eliminate the federal BS and let the Airport Authority PD deal with it. It would be cheaper, more efficiently run and best of all no federal BS, TSA needs to be downgraded to a supervisory agency and not the controlling one.
The TSA needs to be eliminated completely. The whole organization was started as a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11. There have been real security changes since 9/11. We know what those are. The TSA is just for show.
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 07:45 AM
  #118  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 945
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Cycle Pilot
As of yesterday, at the SWA gates at least, it was still the Tub Stacking A$$h...s (TSA) at SFO.
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 08:02 AM
  #119  
Sr. Barco's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Default Rep. John Mica supports dismantling the TSA

This is the support we need.

TSA chief faces lawmakers on pat-downs, body scans - CNN.com

In a letter to aviation authorities, Rep. John Mica, R-Florida, raised the idea of privatization at transport hubs, which he said could improve efficiency and enable airports to opt out of TSA safety regulations.

"It is both inappropriate and inefficient for the TSA to serve as the administrator, quality assurance regulator, operator and auditor of its own activities," Mica, currently the ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said in the letter.

"My aviation subcommittee staff would be pleased to assist you should you move forward with your decision to opt to have a certified private screening program at your airport," he said.
Reply
Old 11-17-2010 | 08:25 AM
  #120  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,233
Likes: 0
Default

Guys,

Sorry to be so uninformed, I am comming of 12 days off and I don't watch news much.

Could you summarize the current situation for me, please:

1. Do I have to go through the body scanner i.e. can I opt out and be manually searched instead?
2. Are the body scanners harmful to health?

Thx
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Ferd149
Mergers and Acquisitions
117
11-08-2023 07:41 AM
freezingflyboy
Regional
201
11-15-2010 07:28 AM
JiffyLube
Major
4
08-21-2008 07:49 PM
Nevets
Regional
18
07-18-2008 02:10 PM
Scoop
Mergers and Acquisitions
38
04-16-2008 07:13 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices