11–20 of 218 posts
On March 1, 2013, San Francisco TSA FYI, "Covenant Aviation Security, a private company under contract with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), provides passenger and baggage screening at SFO." Per http://www.flysfo.com/web/page/atsfo/saf-sec/
Lots of good points. But he does state his disability in public on the web, no problem, while also complaining that he doesn't want to be outed at airports. I'm unclear on why being outed at airports is so bad if telling the whole world is ok. If he addressed this apparent contradiction I'd sympathize even more.
Lots of good points. But he does state his disability in public on the web, no problem, while also complaining that he doesn't want to be outed at airports. I'm unclear on why being outed at airports is so bad if telling the whole world is ok. If he addressed this apparent contradiction I'd sympathize even more.
Furthermore, he's attempting to advocate for others who may also not want their disability known. He gives up his privacy in a certain setting in order to (hopefully) allow many others to never have to give up theirs.
Would be interesting to see if a parallel private system could work. The state could maintain standard to which the private network should adhere, i.e. min basic security, etc. In other words break down the monopoly of travel from the state, you know, like in a free society? I generalize on air travel this because all other forms of travel aren't really adequate in a country as big as ours.
Lots of good points. But he does state his disability in public on the web, no problem, while also complaining that he doesn't want to be outed at airports. I'm unclear on why being outed at airports is so bad if telling the whole world is ok. If he addressed this apparent contradiction I'd sympathize even more.
On the other hand, in your own forum while making a point, it makes perfect sense to use that context to explain why it was embarrassing and is in need of proper training or policy modification.
I hope your case is successful. Over the years TSA has caused nothing but pain, waste, and abuse without catching a single terrorist red-handed with a bomb.
My mother can't travel by plane, because she has aphasia (can't speak) and a leg brace, due to her stroke. If I go through the airport with her, there is no guarantee the agents will let me stay with her and explain the situation. She can't remove the leg brace on her own for them to make sure it's not a weapon, and TSA agents can't do it properly. So, basically, taking her to the airport is a recipe for having her v…
I am - without being an expert - pretty sure there is a procedure for care givers.
The last time I flew - 2010 - it was a few months after my wife had bi-lateral knee surgery. She was mobile, but not spry, not able to walk more than fifty yards at a go.
We had an airport provided wheel chair, a guy or gal to push. My role was care-giver and I got to be with her throughout the procedure. 'Is this your care giver - step this way, Sir.'.
Worked pretty well: the pusher person knew where to go, the TSA goons got us to the head of the line and it worked out.
I don't know about the leg brace, though. That might be a problem.
I'm with you on the TSA being bad news and a worse idea. The day it was announced I knew it would be a goat rope, a hit against the 4th amendment and would never, ever, go away.
But I am old enough to remember when airports had observation decks for the public, anyone could march down to the gate with only a nod to the sleepy airport guy running the scanner, and if you'd told anyone what's going on in 2013 they'd snort and say
'Maybe in the USSR, it's run by commies. But never in the USA.'
We complain about the TSA on here all the time, but it's important to remember that the average American sees absolutely nothing wrong with what the TSA does. They genuinely and wholeheartedly believe that the TSA is helping to make the skies safer for Americans, and that it is doing so without violating any civil liberties. The idea that "if you have nothing to hide, why do you care if the authorities search you?" i…
Public education would lead to... what... mass civil disobedience against the TSA's practices? Maybe, I don't know. Fighting the TSA's de facto policies with legal battles is an appropriate response (that doesn't at all require majority public attention).
We complain about the TSA on here all the time, but it's important to remember that the average American sees absolutely nothing wrong with what the TSA does. They genuinely and wholeheartedly believe that the TSA is helping to make the skies safer for Americans, and that it is doing so without violating any civil liberties. The idea that "if you have nothing to hide, why do you care if the authorities search you?" i…
Won't do any good - the TSA is here to stay, short of the government ceasing to be.
But it's a good fight, and might delay the inevitable for a while.
We complain about the TSA on here all the time, but it's important to remember that the average American sees absolutely nothing wrong with what the TSA does. They genuinely and wholeheartedly believe that the TSA is helping to make the skies safer for Americans, and that it is doing so without violating any civil liberties. The idea that "if you have nothing to hide, why do you care if the authorities search you?" i…