I’m a pilot, and I’m familiar with the FAA’s voluminous regulations. They’re good at enforcing them, but even the FAA has issues with consistency from place to place. The TSA strikes me as far less organized, and besides - you can’t have a rule to cover every possible eventuality.
I remember reading that Southwest Airlines has a policy that an employee can override any company rule (but not an FAA regulation) in the interest of solving a problem with a customer. They may have to explain themselves afterward, but this policy always struck me as smart. Is that sort of thing what we should really be asking of the TSA? Is it silly to expect strict consistency?
It’s pretty silly to be confiscating damn cupcakes. Sounds to me like the TSA agent might have been hungry…and power tripping. Think it may be gel explosive? Fine. Give it a sniff test. Explosives do not smell like frosting. Problem solved.
And yeah, TSA needs to be consistent. If something passes muster at one end of the trip, it should also pass muster at the other end.
This country has gone off the deep end, sacrificing freedom for the false perception of safety. A guy that really wants to blow up a plane will find a way to do it. Crotch-patting grandmothers is not going to stop them. Let folks go through regular metal detectors, and scale back TSA drastically. Spend those dollars on something useful.
Everyone says this but I just don’t see it. The last few flights I’ve been on I’ve passed through security at several airports with no problems at all. I have not seen anybody held up either, nor has anybody I know complained about it.
This all strikes me as confirmation bias. Huge country, millions of travelers, attention on a few incidents. Then twisting it into whatever opinions you have.
I do not understand the fetish Americans have for accusing the government or corporations for heinous offenses like “croch-patting grandmothers” and then twisting a single unrelated incident into a lecture on how this country is going down the toilet, everything needs to be thrown out the window, and we are all “sacrificing our freedom”.
I think people just like to create drama in their lives.
I don’t see how it could possibly be completely consistent with that many screeners, and a seemingly infinite number of items a person could try to bring through airport security.
The FAA regulations are voluminous, but they can’t cover every contingency and they can be interpreted differently. That’s why, sometimes, when they discipline a pilot it doesn’t hold up on appeal. It’s also why highly trained pilots don’t always choose the correct action in a given flight situation. The TSA has it’s own rules and procedures, and since they were created by humans, there is the same kind of wiggle room. If we assume the screener didn’t simply yoink the cupcake to eat it later, something in the TSA rules or procedures made him think the cupcake fell under a suspect category. Turns out it looked bad to the public. So if you’re the TSA and you want to be consistent, what do you do? Institute an “all cupcakes are OK from now on” rule? You couldn’t do that for every situation. It eventually comes down to the judgement of the person on the scene, and that’s never going to be 100% consistent.
All this isn’t to say I’m defending the TSA - far from it. The cupcake incident was breathtakingly stupid and the judgement of the person on the scene in this case was very poor. I also think the agency should be gutted and re-imagined. I just don’t think the “consistency” argument holds a lot of water in itself.
I’d sooner disband the TSA completely and start arresting its worst elements, but consistency would be a good start. If something is safe to take through security, there should be zero chance that it will get caught the next time you run the gauntlet unless something has changed.
I think it’s more that making a rulebook that will cover every eventuality is impossible. No matter how thoroughly you train someone, there’s going to be some situation nobody thought of.
I travel by air regularly–frequently once or more a week–and I have seen TSA agents enforcing rules arbitrarily, performing intrusive searches on people who are very clearly not likely terrorist threats, and generally being incompetent to the point of Python-esque absurdity. Of course, it is hardly the fault of the agents, who receive about the same level of training and certification as a mall security guard, and then are released on the travelling public with the authority to perform genital inspections and make on-the-spot decisions about the suitability of various implements commonly carried by travelers. These people act like basic retail workers because that is the standard to which the are selected and trained to, and as such, provide little in the way of actual protection or deterrence of the supposed thread of a nearly mythological network of well-organized terrorist cells.
In answer to the o.p., yes, there should be a consistent basis for the enforcement of rules governing inspection and confiscation of items in carry-on luggage. The “no liquids or gels except in 3.2 oz bottles” is a terrific example; any number of would-be terrorists could simply combined the requisite amount of material between them to do damage, and in fact a quart-sized ZipLoc™ bag of 3.2 oz containers of a high grade binary explosive, appropriately placed, could do critical and potentially catastrophic damage to a commercial airliner. And yet, you can’t bring a bottle of clear water with you, instead having to purchase it inside the security perimeter for two or three times the cost. And of course, low-paid supply workers can bring in pallets of whatever substance as long as it is superficially disguised as products for sale within the airport.
You can believe that TSA has successfully diverted any number of undetected or unpublicized terrorist attacks in the last ten years (although the government never seems reluctant to make great fuss over capturing some disgruntled 17 year old with a grudged and an unworkable pipe bomb), or that the 19 thugs who used basic cutting implements which were perfectly legal to bring through security in 2001 represented the state of the art in terroristic capability, since not improved upon. Which belief you choose says far more about your capacity for critical judgement than the demonstration of credible threats, since there have been none.
And that should be when you call someone higher up than you to make the decision, rather than arbitrarily deciding for yourself. Let the people actually trained in making decisions handle it, and you stick with what your level of training can handle–checking items off a list.
How about you try educating yourself about what the TSA is actually doing, instead of wallowing in your own ignorance? Then you might understand why we accuse the government of heinous offenses.
Consistency would be a nice start. I have flown four times in the past five weeks, and on the last trip, the TSA agent confiscated a credit-card sized survival tool that I carry with me everywhere. The first three trips, I carried that thing through security no problem. This last time, it was confiscated (not that big a deal, I can get another). When I asked the agent why I was able to fly three different times with it but not this time, he said snottily “Would you like to speak to a supervisor about it?” Dude, NO, but I would like a reasonable explanation.
My understanding is that knives under four inches long (or is it under three inches) are allowed these days. At least, the signs in DIA state that knives under a certain length are allowed. Given that the knife-edge of that tool is about 1.5 inches long, why the difference in treatment?
My reading of the TSA’s site is “no knives of any length allowed.”
Also banned from carry-on are “Razor-Type Blades - such as box cutters, utility knives, and safety razor blades (disposable razors and their cartridges are permitted)”
You may have been thinking of scissors, which are allowed if they are under 4 inches.
This is how terrorist plots must go in their minds:
Bob the Terrorist: You can fashion explosives out of almost anything. 7 oz of Neutrogena toner is all you need to make a bomb.
Joe the Other Terrorist: But the TSA only allows us to carry liquids on board in 3 oz containers.
Bob: Curses!
Terrorist plot averted. TSA high fives themselves.
So anyway, this isn’t a debate; this is another bitch about the TSA thread, which I’ll gladly indulge in as someone who has flown entirely too much. There are many things the TSA does wrong, the most irritatingly stupid of which is their ban against shampoo not packaged in way that makes them feel a sense of accomplishment. That there is no rule on the quantity of liquids and gels brought on board, but there is one on the size of the containers they are carried in, makes me laugh myself into a rage. So I can bring as much blow-this-plane-the-fuck-up gel as I want, so long as it’s distributed properly. Yeah, that’s not just a pain in everyone’s ass, and is an effective method of combating terrorism!
So anyway again, I’m usually behind the school of thought that says hire non-shitheads, pay them decently, and allow them to exercise some judgment, as opposed to the philosophy that endorses hiring zillions of morons stripped of all ability to make decisions, but this is National Security (!!!) so exceptions, especially when made by retail-level security, means terrorism!
So yeah, make your rules and apply them consistently. In theory, they’d all be good rules, but I don’t expect good things anymore. I occasionally hope for things that suck less than they currently do, and hope I am not unrealistic in my want for TSA to not throw away dessert. How can you throw away people’s cupcakes? They’re so sweet.
Ah, that might have been it. So, the inconsistency I should rage at is the three TSA agents who allowed me to take the survival tool on the first three flights, and not the fourth one who confiscated it.
For some reason, I’m thinking that’s even worse inconsistency.
Which serves to highlight yet another absurdity; one pair of scissors minus the rivet is now two reasonably effective bevel-edged knives/punch daggers.
Hey, in baseball, hitting a .300 average is great. .250 isnt that far off.
And for the record, that thing looks like a tool you could use to disassemble the plane in mid-flight. you should feel lucky you didn’t end up in a CIA-run prison in Eastern Europe for sporting that thing.
One thing I do wish is that TSA would figure out once and for all whether corkscrews are or are not allowed. The rules say they are, but I’ve had several confiscated by agents who were clearly not versed on the rules they were enforcing. One insisted that it counted as “a knife” even though it had no foil cutter on it, and another claimed that the screw was “too long” as if they came in dramatically different lengths. I would suspect that they are thieving my corkscrews for their own private use if I wasn’t already convincd that they all drink bumwine.