I confess, when it was very first suggested that airport screeners should be employees of the Federal Government, I thought that was a good idea. I mistakenly believed that this meant they would have to meet the same standards as many other Federal employees, including that they pass a civil service exam and have their background checked. I was wrong. TSA screeners don’t even strictly speaking have to have a GED.
So, here we are 3 years into the Age of Terror-Threats. Today, we have a new nominee for Secretary of Homeland Security, an emotionally charged title which is supposed to make us think of Mom, Baseball and Apple Pie (and maybe ’57 Chevys), but unfortunately makes me think of European Nationalism. I hope Mr. Kerik is wearing protective gear, because he is about to walk into a big mess.
I am speaking of a problem so big that even editorial cartoons are piling on. I speak of invasive searches at the airport. Here is one account, another account wherein it is made clear that the TSA is not permitted to clarify the situation, and a rebuttal from someone who obviously does not understand the problem. To be selected for such a search, one does not need to set off any alarms, merely have an unusual shape. There is some evidence that the TSA doesn’t even follow their own rules when conducting such searches. Such incidents may well be severely under-reported due to a fear of being placed on a Do Not Fly list.
Just because people are not submitting formal complaints to the TSA does not mean they aren’t complaining.
But it gets worse than this. There is plenty of evidence that many screeners are abusing their authority, abusing the fact that nobody gets on a commercial airliner unless they say so. Here is an account of alleged strip searches at one airport and a story of a man who has experimented with the TSA’s rules regarding shoe removal, entitled “Screenings at airports confound men, too.”
Now think about this. We are worried about miniscule quantities of explosives being hidden in women’s bras, but we are only inspecting 10-20% of the tons of cargo that go in the very same airplane. If you wrap a Christmas present in your carry-on or checked luggage, it may have to be unwrapped even though it will be on the plane with you; if you mail it, the same package may go on the same airplane without you, and receive no inspection whatsoever.
I would advise you to write your Congressional representatives, but it has been made clear that Congress will only be considering issues that please “a majority of the majority.”
When can we stop pretending this has anything to do with keeping us safe and everything to do with keeping us in line?
The last time I flew, I had the experience that failure to remove your shoes resulted in being hand searched. I also noticed something more interesting…
I was wearing shoes that I had been through metal detectors with many times before, without any problems. Additionally, the screening line (at Denver International) was overflowing from the screening area. They have a zig-zaggy roped off area, and that could only hold about half the people waiting to be screened. This is the first time I’ve seen anything like this at DIA.
During the time we were waiting as we appoached the checkpoint, I didn’t see anyone get pulled aside. However, my going through the checkpoint with my shoes on, despite not setting off the metal detector, caused me to get hand screened. Usually there are at least a couple of people getting hand screened at any given time when I’ve been there, but I was the only one who got hand screened while I was there.
I’d never been hand-searched before. I had no complaints about how it was conducted. It was annoying that I was searched because I wouldn’t remove my shoes. They just want to show you who’s boss, it seems.
The implications of fewer (if any) searches happening when it’s super busy are quite scary. They really haven’t though this whole “security” thing out.
Sean