Slashdot Mirror
TSA Union Calls For Armed Guards At Every Checkpoint
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Brian Tumulty writes at USA Today that the union representing airport screeners for the Transportation Security Administration says Friday's fatal shooting of an agent at Los Angeles International Airport highlights the need for armed security officers at every airport checkpoint. The screeners, who earn up to $30,000 annually, have not requested to carry guns themselves, but they do want an armed security officer present at every checkpoint says J. David Cox Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents the screeners. "Every local airport has its own security arrangement with local police to some type of contract security force," says Cox. "There is no standardization throughout the country. Every airport operates differently. Obviously at L.A. there were a fair number of local police officers there." Congress may investigate the issue but Sen. Tom Carper, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, says that "there will be an appropriate time — after all the facts have been gathered and thoughtfully analyzed —to review existing policy and procedure to see what, if anything, can be learned from this unfortunate incident to help prevent future tragedies." TSA officials say that they don't anticipate a change in the agency security posture at the moment, but "passengers may see an increased presence of local law enforcement officers throughout the country.""
I think this is a good idea. If/when future similar incidents occur, all those that are NOT carrying a firearm will be secondary targets. The poor guy who's carrying is just going to be the first guy shot, giving everyone else a slight chance to duck and hide.
...armed gunman opens fire on unarmed targets, and the logical response is to request that his targets be allowed to arm themselves to fend off future attacks of a similar nature. Remind me again why it's practically impossible for me to purchase a handgun to defend myself in California?
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
The solution is obviously... more guns.
Maybe reexamine the way mental illness is treated and use the money improve.
Kind of like how like how the Prison gaurds union oppose reform of drug laws. Because they are representing the gaurds and their jobs, and they would be hurt by any sane policy.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Just get rid of the TSA.
Isn't the union representing the screeners? MY question is - who gets the kickback for the contract on the new armed guards? It's unthinkable that no one will. How about hiring Blackwater? They seemed pretty good at shooting civilians.
So if there's a mall shooting the solution is armed guards in every mall? If there's a school shooting the solution is armed guards in every school? Every bus station, train station, subway station, park and so on until there's a whole army of armed guards running around? The point of the secuity control is that nobody gets to bring anything on board to crash or hijack the plane and in that respect, mission accomplished. It's not a general defense against a random person pulling out a gun and opening fire, not any more than any other place.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
In order to protect the TSA agents, the TSA should be disbanded. You can't shoot what's not there!
--- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
TSA has been looking for an excuse to arm it's people. Watch them try to turn this incident into that excuse. Mind you, arming ex-hamburger flippers will endanger the public more than protect it, but arming TSA goons would be a huge step in proper bureaucratic empire building.
Want protection from nutcases? Sorry, that's not gonna happen - in a nation of more than 300 million people, there will always be nutcases.
Want to reduce the target-rich environment that is the TSA checkpoint? That's easy, get rid of TSA and let the airports and airlines deal with security.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
What they need to do is fix the real issues with check points. Get rid of the security theater, the 3.4 oz fluid limits, the shoes removals, the body scanners, the biggest of all being the understaffing of the checkpoints that allow the mass lines that would attract a terrorist to begin with and so on. Start training the TSA on real security measures and start teach training them on profiling. When's the last time you heard about an Isreali plane being hijacked - and they let you bring a pocket-knife on board?
The problem with the TSA isn't the members of the TSA, they are doing what they are trained to do. The problem is that Congress is overseeing the TSA and allowing politics to trump security. It's like getting mad at the IRS when the IRS is only doing what congress told them to do. Get mad at congress for giving them the byzantine rules to begin with.
The TSA should be staffed by real armed Federal Officers, with real training, and real skills. Start by phasing in the replacement of the current supervisors with real officers and work your way from there. The next thing they should do is follow the Federal Reserve model and make the TSA semi-independent from regular politics so that they can focus more on security and less on politics.
The day the color codes, shoes removals, 3.4 oz removals and similar useless rules go and get replaced by having the (usually unmanned) additional screening checkpoints getting opened up is the day you know the TSA has finally started to get security.
Wait until you arm them. Now 6 year old kids can watch their mothers get guns pointed in their faces while being groped.
If we follow the logic through to the end, everybody, everywhere needs an armed guard; just in case the lunatic-du-jour decides that's where he wants to kill people.
Marathon runs obviously need an armed guard every 10 yards along the course. We have proof that terrorists see marathon runs as a target!
No sig today...
If the LAX shooter had been interested in mowing down passengers instead of TSA agents, then armed guards at the TSA checkpoints would have done nothing to protect those passengers. At LAX in places like Terminal 3, the lines to the security checkpoints can flow out of the building and onto the sidewalk creating a massive concentration of terrorist targets. Protecting them 100% with armed guards would require 10 times the number of agents that are currently employed. Providing armed guards at the checkpoints themselves only protects those around the checkpoints i.e. the TSA agents themselves.
If anything the best way to protect the passengers is to process them from the street and into the secured terminal at a faster pace, which would require a huge increase in TSA checkpoints. This is an inherently parallelizable task, but would require money to be spent. But terminals in places such as LAX aren't designed for such parallel operations. Using Terminal 3 as an example, you enter from street level then go up a flight of stairs/escalator, following an S-shaped path that snakes around back on itself before arriving at the security checkpoint. Once there, there is only enough room for 2 or 3 parallel operations at once.
BTW last time I was flying out of Orlando I encountered a private company that would sell you the ability to jump to the front of the TSA queue. So instead of building out the infrastructure to better accommodate the passengers in light of having to go through the TSA, the airport grants a license to this company to exploit the frustrations and $$ of the people in the queue. (Which is turn pisses off the other passengers who experience smug people pushing in front of them in the queue and highlighting of how class based US society is).
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
It's not the TSA, it's the union representing the TSA screeners.
Who do you think make up the union if not the TSA screeners? I am sick and tired of the overreaction to these random events whether it be aircraft crashing into a building, a workplace shooting, a bomb detonation at a public event, etc. I do not feel safe with roaming machine-gun-toting police officers or military in any venue.
Hint: "Armed security officers" can also be untrained overpaid mouthbreathers with power trip issues.
All it takes for them to get involved in a situation is a nod from one of the currently employed untrained overpaid mouthbreathers with power trip issues and one of the the newly employed untrained overpaid mouthbreathers with power trip issues will be right there to help.
No sig today...
I personally love how if we americans demand to arm our selves from protection we are somehow the bad guys in the eyes of the government, yet when one of their own gets shot its time to arm up! hypocrisy at its best people
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
back around 1990 there WAS a mass shooting in the food court of the mall across the street from my office (Perimeter Mall in suburban Atlanta). forget the exact casualty count but there were multiple victims, it was sad but people realized it was an unfortunate isolated incident/not the first wave of an invasion & life went back to normal pretty quickly. I'd bet you a fairly expensive dinner you could take a poll of patrons there now & less than 5% would even know this incident ever happened...
soooo... shooting happened, people grieved for a few days & nearly 1/4 century later few people even remember it (I probably wouldn't if I didn't work with people who were there) and there have been exactly ZERO recurrences despite the conspicuous absence of a bear patrol - go figure...
I whole heartedly condemn the shooter, both in principle as well as pragmatically b/c people are already seizing the opportunity to tar anyone w/legitimate criticisms of tsa w/same brush as the shooter ("you're just an anti-govt nut!!!"). I wouldn't have thought it possible but this incident is a significant setback for any hope of meaningful reform...
After hearing of the guy who was left alone because he wasn't working for the TSA, it seemed like this guy wasn't just out for a killing spree or some anti-government nut job, but had a very specific reason to hate the TSA.
I can't help but wonder if he was molested as a child and the TSA's enhanced screening procedures set him off. The TSA's official training materials specifically give tips on how to handle young children. It's interesting to contrast it with the training given to parents who participate in cub/boy scout events, so they know how to recognize inappropriate behavior and potential risks from pervs. Having done the scout training first and seen some of the TSA materials after, it really stands out as a how-to program for pedophiles.
Marathon runs obviously need an armed guard every 10 yards along the course. We have proof that terrorists see marathon runs as a target!
You joke, but...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/02/us-usa-newyork-marathon-idUSBRE9A104A20131102
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I say - arm everyone. Every passenger can carry a weapon. Shut down the checkpoints. Anyone who comes through, just comes through. If EVERYONE has a weapon, then everyone is safe.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Exactly - give anyone who wants to carry the right to carry. Oh - wait. That's already in the CONSTITUTION!!
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Why the fuck is a government agency unionized in the first place?
For the same reasons that employees of any organization have ever unionized: for protection from their employers. Duh. ;-)
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Which is an absolutely understandable request from the point of view of the TSA screeners.
"Look, government policy is putting us in harm's way. We are now targets. We think we should be protected from loonies. Armed guards to shoot any such loonies is one method we might be protected."
Assuming the TSA checkpoints remain, it is not a ridiculous idea and the union - nominally representing the screeners - are quite right to make this request since the welfare of those screeners is their business . The screeners themselves, however much they may be gaining advantage from the program, are not the ones who have created the policy that provides those jobs (and, from my limited experience with them, those I have met think the program is as stupid as we do, but one does not turn down a job these days). So I can hardly blame the screeners for making a fuss about the need for more protection. However, as citizens of this country, we have other things to consider, such as:
- Do we want to turn our country into an armed camp with soldiers at every corner?
- While the soldiers might help protect the screeners, will they themselves just be another target?
- Are there any alternatives to armed guards (bullet-proof boxes for the screeners, or the ever-popular "arm everyone" meme?)
- Is the TSA screening program effective and might it not be better just rid the country of the program - and thus the need for the armed guards as well.
So rather than just lambast the union - and the TSA screeners - for making this justified request, perhaps it might be better to use this as an opportunity to re-evaluate the TSA program entirely in a moment when its supporters just may be more willing to listen to alternatives?
Let's give guns to a bunch of untrained overpaid mouthbreathers with power trip issues!
Yes, I've also wondered about the wisdom of allowing Americans to have guns.
Sorry, couldn't resist a setup like that...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Not in their minds.
Well the odds of there being TWO bombs on the plane are astronomical, so I always bring a bomb on the plane with me.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
Does this mean Obama will stop his anti-second amendment agenda now?
Stop spreading lies or being ignorant or both.
Obama has done nothing related to gun control in his years in office except make it easier for people to own whatever type of firearm they want.
He has signed legislation allowing guns in National Parks and on Amtrack trains.
He signed legislation that makes concealed carry permits valid in one state valid in all states.
He has never pushed an "assault" weapons ban or even restrictions on large capacity magazines.
His justice department has never challenged any of the numerous state level laws that have increased gun rights (Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Wyoming, Texas, North Dakota, etc.) or any of the stand-your-ground laws.
He is one of the most pro-gun Presidents in recent times and yet right wing delusionals (and firearm business interests) still trot out he is trying to take away guns.
Wax on, wax off baby!
The screeners, who earn up to $30,000 annually
There are some places where that seems fine, but I'm thinking LA? That's a lousy salary....
Yes, but it appears to be wrong. According to tsasalary.com, TSA inspectors earn an average of $45,000, and earn even more in high cost cities. Other links corroborate this amount, while none list a salary as low as $30k. Even the lowest starting salary is higher than that.
You realize that the last major threats on aircraft that got by TSA were all stopped by the passengers? That any major event that a shooter has gone nuts and started killing people within an armed area were a maximum 1 to 2 people? That shooters have specifically targeted areas with limited access to firearms to maximize the amount of damage they can do before being stopped? Have you ever heard of a shootout at an NRA convention? Mass killing in a gun store? A hijacking of a military transport?
Sounds like we need to unionize - maybe we can get protection from their employers also...
Because you don't sell more guns as quickly if the president is seen as letting you keep buying them. It's all a marketing gimmick by the gun industry. "Obammy's gonna take yur guns! Buy more now!!" And they line up. They say the same thing any time a Democrat is elected.
Are you against free enterprise with your truthful statements? What are you, some sort of commie pinko?!
Give up?
They have never stopped anything. Everything gets by them and has been stopped on the plane or failed on the plane. They only exist to get you used to "showing your papers" and getting searched.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
The shooting at the NRA convention was an April Fools joke. I know you hoped it was true, but that kind of thing doesn't actually happen.
There was a shooting at a gun show a while back, some idiot brought in a loaded shotgun to sell it, and it went off when he set it on a table. In the middle of a hall with many armed people, that was the only shot fired.
How long until it's not just some crazy guy off his meds and a normal person with a legitimate grievance...like a loved one being denied care under Obamacare?
Not as long until some unformed idiot poses a question like that.
You do know that "Obamacare" isn't an insurance plan or insurance company - right? You do know that the ACA only specifies *minimum* levels that all insurance plans must provide - right? You do know that all those plans are offered by private insurance companies - right? You do know that *private* insurance companies deny care all the fucking time, except now, under the ACA, they have fewer avenues to do so (no more: life-time limits or denials based on pre-existing conditions - before or after the fact) - right?
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Name one thing the TSA has stopped. One.
Well... They almost stopped me from traveling once because I asked a question about something. The guy then said, "do you want to travel today?" I said, "yes." He said, "then be quiet." If I had been single and not traveling with others, I might have protested, but instead I played "good sheep."
So, they're good at intimidating innocent people.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .