Slashdot Mirror


US House 'Creator' of TSA Wants To Kill It

U.S. Representative John Mica (R-Florida), the sponsor of the original House bill that helped create the TSA, has become an outspoken opponent of the agency. In a recent interview, "Mica said screeners should be privatized and the agency dismantled." Mica seems to agree with other TSA critics that the agency 'failed to actually detect any threat in 10 years.' Mica is the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman and receives classified briefings on TSA. Perhaps we should trust him more than most people on this topic. In an older ABC news article (ignore the unrelated video) Mica describes how he deals with security checkpoints. "He won't go through a full body scanner at an airport because 'I don't want them circulating pictures of my beautiful body' all over. He said he opts for a pat-down, and just 'closes his eyes and imagines a beautiful female.'"

8 of 681 comments (clear)

  1. Privatization? by halestock · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just what we want, to pay more for less security.

    1. Re:Privatization? by ryants · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Privatized airport security works just fine in Canada.

      --

      Ryan T. Sammartino
      "Ancora imparo"

  2. Umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Perhaps we should first ask, does Mica own stock or part of any private security firms?

  3. Re:Yeah... by ryants · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Canada has had privatized airport security since... the mid 1990s if memory serves. As you know, the result has been weekly bombings and anal cavity searches. Oh, wait, no, it's the complete opposite. Quick, efficient and effective scanning.

    --

    Ryan T. Sammartino
    "Ancora imparo"

  4. I can solve the problem for half the population: by Thud457 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hire only attractive female screeners, two drink minimum.
    Turn this around into a profit center. As a bonus, flyers are less stressed. winning all around.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  5. Re:Got my vote by don_weber · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Kind of like our choices for internet connectivity.

  6. Re:Got my vote by smelch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It could and should be and would be and likely will happen after a privatization assuming government doesn't interfere with a regulation. What kind of airline wouldn't jump at the chance to be the only grope-free way to travel? So you can bitch and moan about the free-market all you want, the only thing that could stop meaningful competition in airport security is the government.

    --
    If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
  7. Re:Got my vote by enrevanche · · Score: 3, Interesting

    About as brain dead as privatizing parking meters. It may bring more government revenue for a short time, but will end up costing more money in the long run, especially after, due to lack of maintenance so that short term profits can be maximized, it has to be bailed out by the government. In the meantime, fliers will pay more to fly with less safety.