Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TSA's Head of Security 'Removed' from Office

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 167 posts

Re: TSA's Head of Security 'Removed' from Office

#101

Post by pavel_lishin »

jkot wrote: post #30
appleflaxen wrote: post #3

The most galling aspect is the $90,000 bonus, broken up into $10,000 increments to escape scrutiny. Who is running the TSA circus?

I find this ridiculous. TSA employs 55k people and has budged $8B. Sure its director should be pay reasonably. At the same time Yahoo CEO gets over $150M and people applaud it. I get private versus public organization difference, but TSA is bigger than Yahoo.

Reasonable pay is fine, but why would he receive a bonus when the organization is not performing well? Furthermore, why would that bonus be paid explicitly in a surreptitious way?

Re: TSA's Head of Security 'Removed' from Office

#103

Post by marze »

btilly wrote: post #92

Can we just get rid of the TSA? Current estimates are that hundreds of people die each year in car accidents because they chose to drive rather than deal with TSA lines. This means that every few years the TSA manages to inflict more casualties than 9/11 did. In addition to inconvenience, economic inefficiency, and a demonstrably ineffective screening process that weapons can easily get through. (As many have shown.)…

This is naive. Why would you assume the same number of successful attacks on air travel would occur without the security?

You can't argue that the current system hasn't done well, it has performed fantastically, based on the number of successful attacks within the US.

That said, they need a lot more screeners, and to be much more polite. And get rid of incompetent management.

Re: TSA's Head of Security 'Removed' from Office

#105

Post by ivraatiems »

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #76
ivraatiems wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way Israel achieves their efficacy is blatant racial profiling. I've been to Israel several times, and because I am a white Jewish American, I have no problems. If I had brown skin, or was Muslim, or wasn't from the US, there's a good chance I'd just not be let in. Now, it works extremely well. Can't deny that. And it's legal under Israeli law. But it would be blatantly illegal here.

Israeli profiling is far more sophisticated than "blatant racial profiling" as the above commenter baselessly claims. For one thing, many Jews in Israel are of Middle Eastern origin and appear identical to Muslim Arabs. The Israelis use several layers of profiling: a preliminary sweep as you are checking in, which assigns you a particular "risk level" based on your country of origin, profession, behavior, and other d…

Your own article contradicts your suggestion that my claim is "baseless."

> As Lia Tarachansky wrote back in 2010 for Mondoweiss, while a one rating "is awesome," a six indicates that "you're f-----." It appears to be reserved for Palestinians, Muslims, and hostile internationals.

Palestinians and Muslims? That's ethnic and religious profiling, and together I think you could call it racial as well. And yes, Israeli Arabs are citizens of Israel with allegedly the same level of rights and responsibilities as any other, but they too face significant systemic discrimination (although not as far as leaving/entering the country is concerned, as far as I know).

But your main point - that the Israeli system is complex and intelligent - is true. It IS a complex, thought-out, professional system. It does work better than that of the US. That doesn't mean it is suited for the United States, or that it doesn't involve discrimination of a kind that would be illegal in the US.

I do not begrudge Israel its system. I believe it is necessary for the country's safety, though I don't like it very much. I just don't think it can or should work here.

Re: TSA's Head of Security 'Removed' from Office

#106

Post by milesokeefe »

jkot wrote: post #30
appleflaxen wrote: post #3

The most galling aspect is the $90,000 bonus, broken up into $10,000 increments to escape scrutiny. Who is running the TSA circus?

I find this ridiculous. TSA employs 55k people and has budged $8B. Sure its director should be pay reasonably. At the same time Yahoo CEO gets over $150M and people applaud it. I get private versus public organization difference, but TSA is bigger than Yahoo.

He should be paid reasonably, but he shouldn't be given bonuses for underperforming.

Re: TSA's Head of Security 'Removed' from Office

#108

Post by mapgrep »

tptacek wrote: post #69
mapgrep wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a small thing: Starve the beast is emphatically a right-wing tactic, and well known one at that. To call it ideologically neutral w/r/t government is blatantly wrong. Whether it's technically neoconservative or not is a red herring. (Neoconservative being just one subset of the overall conservative movement.)

Starve-the-beast is certainly a conservative strategy! RIF through attrition, though, is a general management technique. "Starve the beast" refers to cutting government revenue to force tougher decisions about which departments to reduce or eliminate. I agree, like I said, it's just a nit.

Fair distinction!

Re: TSA's Head of Security 'Removed' from Office

#109

Post by marcus_holmes »

smoothgrips wrote: post #88
marcus_holmes wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can work this out. Everyone in the USA has the right to bear arms, and a lot of them do. Result: huge murder rate. Everyone in the rest of the world does not have the right to carry guns around the place. Result: much smaller murder rate. I think we can infer that if everyone could take guns on planes then we'd have more people shooting guns on planes and hence more death on planes. Going from that to stop…

Your reasoning is not accurate. When you allow honest citizens to defend themselves, crime rates drop. "Statistics show that in these states the crime rate fell (or did not rise) after the right-to-carry law became active (as of July, 2006)." http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/

Listen to what you're saying here. Crime rates drop because people are scared that they might get shot. That's literally the implication of that statement.

You're saying that the best response to crime is for people to shoot each other. Not better policing or a better criminal justice system, but random gun battles.

Is it any wonder that the murder rate so much higher in the USA than in other similarly-developed countries?

"you pissed me off. That's practically a crime. I should shoot you now. Oh look I'm carrying a gun. bang"

Re: TSA's Head of Security 'Removed' from Office

#110

Post by logfromblammo »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #80
mr_spothawk wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fly frequently through a limited set of airports. I rarely see the millimeter scanner at less than max throughput. That said I regularly do what I can to slow things down, and sometimes take the pat down in favor of hassling the staff. Attrition is damned right. The TSA scam is awful, and I hope we can get rid of it soon.

My personal experience is just the opposite. I always see the nudie scanners languishing for 30 seconds or more between people. The delay seems to be the baggage x-ray. If that's true, then some other things fit neatly into place. The airline escalation of baggage check fees has driven people to carrying more stuff. That, in turn, means that more stuff needs to go through the x-ray conveyor, which slows down that pro…

To be fair, some people were only carrying more things because they didn't want their stuff stolen out of their checked baggage, or for it to be otherwise lost in transit.

Stealing stuff right out of the security checkpoint ought to make those folks think twice, right?

Post reply on HN