3 ms·

Like the ten screeners arrested for smuggling in the past 18 months? If terrorists were interested in taking out a plane, TSA would be the easiest way to get a

by Fisher1949 14y ago

Like the ten screeners arrested for smuggling in the past 18 months? If terrorists were interested in taking out a plane, TSA would be the easiest way to get a bomb aboard. They'd bribe the screeners and tell them the bomb was drugs. No TSA would place security with the FAA which would be world's better. FAA is already doing a great job handling air traffic control and airline safety so they would do a far better job than the criminals, perverts and pedophiles that work at TSA.

evoxed 14y ago
But FAA security wouldn't exactly fix any of the problems in your scenario, except as far as they are consolidated and perhaps more accountable to their employers...
taligent 14y ago
And how many people work at the TSA ? No offense but what you said was grossly insulting to the good people who do work at the TSA. There are bad characters in ANY organisation. I fail to see why the TSA would be magically exempt.
- mikeash 14y ago
  So what if they're not magically exempt. If this is something inherent to any organization like it, then that just means the entire concept is flawed.
  - taligent 14y ago
    How is the entire concept flawed just because of a small percentage of employees ? Because that would also mean that every industry that involves someone in a position of power is also flawed. You will never be able to stop these things from happening. You can just contain and minimize the risk.
    - mikeash 14y ago
      Because when you're guarding against events that are literally one in a billion, it defeats the whole purpose if your setup allows corrupt employees to sneak contraband through screening.
- david_shaw 14y ago
  >There are bad characters in ANY organisation. I fail to see why the TSA would be magically exempt. I agree with this statement: any organization in this position is vulnerable to attack. However, it should be noted--as was the grandparent comment's intent, I believe--that the TSA, rather than providing additional security, appears to be introducing an additional vulnerability.
- bobowha 14y ago
  Anybody who is willing to grope, harass, and intimidate innocent people (part of the job description) is a bad person!!! Good people (i.e. those who are not morally bereft), would never work for the TSA!!!
einhverfr 14y ago
The problem with bribery is you don't know who you can bribe and who you can't. The TSA screeners I personally know I am pretty sure wouldn't take bribes. There are enough professionally minded individuals in the organization to make that more or less out of the question. Also my experience is there is a huge difference in per-airport culture just as there is with customs and immigration. If I was trying to to smuggle a bomb onto a plane, I'd take a more direct approach. I'd apply for a job as a TSO before making any other concrete plans.

evoxed 14y ago

But FAA security wouldn't exactly fix any of the problems in your scenario, except as far as they are consolidated and perhaps more accountable to their employers...

taligent 14y ago

And how many people work at the TSA ? No offense but what you said was grossly insulting to the good people who do work at the TSA. There are bad characters in ANY organisation. I fail to see why the TSA would be magically exempt.

mikeash 14y ago
So what if they're not magically exempt. If this is something inherent to any organization like it, then that just means the entire concept is flawed.
- taligent 14y ago
  How is the entire concept flawed just because of a small percentage of employees ? Because that would also mean that every industry that involves someone in a position of power is also flawed. You will never be able to stop these things from happening. You can just contain and minimize the risk.
  - mikeash 14y ago
    Because when you're guarding against events that are literally one in a billion, it defeats the whole purpose if your setup allows corrupt employees to sneak contraband through screening.
david_shaw 14y ago
>There are bad characters in ANY organisation. I fail to see why the TSA would be magically exempt. I agree with this statement: any organization in this position is vulnerable to attack. However, it should be noted--as was the grandparent comment's intent, I believe--that the TSA, rather than providing additional security, appears to be introducing an additional vulnerability.
bobowha 14y ago
Anybody who is willing to grope, harass, and intimidate innocent people (part of the job description) is a bad person!!! Good people (i.e. those who are not morally bereft), would never work for the TSA!!!

einhverfr 14y ago

The problem with bribery is you don't know who you can bribe and who you can't. The TSA screeners I personally know I am pretty sure wouldn't take bribes. There are enough professionally minded individuals in the organization to make that more or less out of the question. Also my experience is there is a huge difference in per-airport culture just as there is with customs and immigration. If I was trying to to smuggle a bomb onto a plane, I'd take a more direct approach. I'd apply for a job as a TSO before making any other concrete plans.