5 ms·

I hate the TSA with every ounce of my being and these articles reinforce why. Incompetent and useless agency that only serves to waste people's time. Can't beli

I hate the TSA with every ounce of my being and these articles reinforce why. Incompetent and useless agency that only serves to waste people's time. Can't believe it still exists; 9/11 and the Bush administration really did a number on this country.

grishka 2y ago
We as a civilization are terrible at getting over things, it seems.
- dgfitz 2y ago
  Oh it gets even more amusing. By the logic of the GP, Bush must have impersonated every member of the house and senate because they're not aware of how the TSA came into existence/how a law is created. The Aviation and Transportation Act garnered broad bipartisan support.
  - hypeatei 2y ago
    It was referring more to the time period and general power grab that the federal government was involved in (Patriot Act, Protect America Act, etc..) Also, Bush had to sign the ASTA into law (checks and balances) which he did so he's part of the problem.
    - bigstrat2003 2y ago
      He certainly was part of the problem, but I think that the way it was phrased originally implied he was the majority of the problem. In truth, these measures had broad support from not only our elected representatives, but from the people themselves. Turns out that people do not actually give a shit about civil liberties, and our representative democracy acted accordingly.
rootusrootus 2y ago
It doesn't seem particularly unique to TSA. Flying elsewhere in the world has essentially identical security screening, with all the same stupidity. I'm a little butthurt right now, in particular, about the security at Heathrow. They confiscated a bottle of whisky that we got in Edinburgh. After 10 minutes of head-scratching and consulting with a supervisor, they concluded that "it does not say 100ml" (it had "10cl" cast into the glass) and "even then, that is just the size of the bottle, not the liquid inside it." What an incredible demonstration of intelligence there. They gave us a receipt and said we could have it shipped. We checked when we got home. 130 GBP with shipping. Ended up just buying a 700ml bottle from an importer, cost about half as much.
- anal_reactor 2y ago
  The problem boils down to two issues: 1. Ok, security is bad, what are you going to do? Go to different, competing security? 2. Nobody wants to be the politician that relaxes the security right before an accident, even if the accident wouldn't be prevented with tighter security anyway.
  - cyberax 2y ago
    > 1. Ok, security is bad, what are you going to do? Go to different, competing security? Amazingly, you can do that. SFO doesn't use the TSA, for example.
    - rachofsunshine 2y ago
      Does it not? I fly out of SFO all the time and the experience is very similar. I guess I never checked if it was officially the TSA, but I never noticed any difference.
      - rst 2y ago
        SFO security is run by some company "under contract" to TSA -- probably required to follow all the same procedures, so it's not clear the business arrangement makes that much difference to the passengers. I've been through there a few times, and haven't found it any more organized or pleasant... https://www.flysfo.com/about/airport-operations/safety-security https://www.flysfo.com/about/airport-operations/safety-secur...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ravenstine 2y ago
They're one of the most seemingly incompetent agencies I am forced to deal with every year. For one, why does is it that every TSA checkpoint feels like it was scrambled together? 9/11 was a long time ago. There's no reason why checkpoints can't have better signage, clearer instructions for what should or shouldn't go on a conveyor belt, an efficient system for returning containers (I've lost count of how many times the line was held up because employees didn't feel like bringing over a stack of containers in clear view), and so on. The checkpoints do seem to go a bit faster than they used to a long time ago, but it's still a frustrating process that makes me feel like an imbecile every time I use it. I do my best to follow directions, but directions are often lacking so I have to use my best judgment from past experience, and often get yelled at anyway. Do does the TSA want to be hated? Secondly, there's been multiple occasions where I've made it through the security checkpoint with items that should obviously set off red flags. I recently made it through with a humongous center punch which, while not sharp like a knife, could do some serious damage to another person if used as a weapon. Got it through with no questions asked. I've also gotten through with scissors, knives, strangely shaped electronics, a custom build electronic device that a naive person could see as suspicious, and so on. Never have I been stopped for those things. But laptops and e-readers? I'd better not forget one of them in my carry-on bag or I'm gonna get shouted at and be forced to re-run the bag through the scanner again. I can get through with sharp metallic tools and weird unlabeled boxes with wires hanging out of them, but I can't leave my kindle in my backpack? And what about the humongous battery packs I carry? No problem having 2 or 3 of those in my bag. I guess my Macbook Air or my e-reader possess uniquely dangerous powers I don't comprehend. Even if I try to comply with the "laptops out of your bag" rule, I might still get shouted at if I place it in a container instead of right on the conveyor belt... or if I place it in a container with some other belongings next to it. Maybe the TSA stops terrorists that are as stupid as they are, which I guess is a good thing. But how good can stupid people be at catching other stupid people? Is it really worth it to waste everyone else's time and to treat them like crap in the process? Yup, not surprised that the TSA also reacts with as much stupidity to cybersecurity flaws. If I became supreme leader overnight, I would work to completely dismantle the TSA and rebuild it from scratch. There doesn't appear to be any value in that agency that can't be easily replaced with something better.
- 2y ago

grishka 2y ago

We as a civilization are terrible at getting over things, it seems.

dgfitz 2y ago
Oh it gets even more amusing. By the logic of the GP, Bush must have impersonated every member of the house and senate because they're not aware of how the TSA came into existence/how a law is created. The Aviation and Transportation Act garnered broad bipartisan support.
- hypeatei 2y ago
  It was referring more to the time period and general power grab that the federal government was involved in (Patriot Act, Protect America Act, etc..) Also, Bush had to sign the ASTA into law (checks and balances) which he did so he's part of the problem.
  - bigstrat2003 2y ago
    He certainly was part of the problem, but I think that the way it was phrased originally implied he was the majority of the problem. In truth, these measures had broad support from not only our elected representatives, but from the people themselves. Turns out that people do not actually give a shit about civil liberties, and our representative democracy acted accordingly.

rootusrootus 2y ago

It doesn't seem particularly unique to TSA. Flying elsewhere in the world has essentially identical security screening, with all the same stupidity. I'm a little butthurt right now, in particular, about the security at Heathrow. They confiscated a bottle of whisky that we got in Edinburgh. After 10 minutes of head-scratching and consulting with a supervisor, they concluded that "it does not say 100ml" (it had "10cl" cast into the glass) and "even then, that is just the size of the bottle, not the liquid inside it." What an incredible demonstration of intelligence there. They gave us a receipt and said we could have it shipped. We checked when we got home. 130 GBP with shipping. Ended up just buying a 700ml bottle from an importer, cost about half as much.

anal_reactor 2y ago
The problem boils down to two issues: 1. Ok, security is bad, what are you going to do? Go to different, competing security? 2. Nobody wants to be the politician that relaxes the security right before an accident, even if the accident wouldn't be prevented with tighter security anyway.
- cyberax 2y ago
  > 1. Ok, security is bad, what are you going to do? Go to different, competing security? Amazingly, you can do that. SFO doesn't use the TSA, for example.
  - rachofsunshine 2y ago
    Does it not? I fly out of SFO all the time and the experience is very similar. I guess I never checked if it was officially the TSA, but I never noticed any difference.
    - rst 2y ago
      SFO security is run by some company "under contract" to TSA -- probably required to follow all the same procedures, so it's not clear the business arrangement makes that much difference to the passengers. I've been through there a few times, and haven't found it any more organized or pleasant... https://www.flysfo.com/about/airport-operations/safety-security https://www.flysfo.com/about/airport-operations/safety-secur...

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ravenstine 2y ago

They're one of the most seemingly incompetent agencies I am forced to deal with every year. For one, why does is it that every TSA checkpoint feels like it was scrambled together? 9/11 was a long time ago. There's no reason why checkpoints can't have better signage, clearer instructions for what should or shouldn't go on a conveyor belt, an efficient system for returning containers (I've lost count of how many times the line was held up because employees didn't feel like bringing over a stack of containers in clear view), and so on. The checkpoints do seem to go a bit faster than they used to a long time ago, but it's still a frustrating process that makes me feel like an imbecile every time I use it. I do my best to follow directions, but directions are often lacking so I have to use my best judgment from past experience, and often get yelled at anyway. Do does the TSA want to be hated? Secondly, there's been multiple occasions where I've made it through the security checkpoint with items that should obviously set off red flags. I recently made it through with a humongous center punch which, while not sharp like a knife, could do some serious damage to another person if used as a weapon. Got it through with no questions asked. I've also gotten through with scissors, knives, strangely shaped electronics, a custom build electronic device that a naive person could see as suspicious, and so on. Never have I been stopped for those things. But laptops and e-readers? I'd better not forget one of them in my carry-on bag or I'm gonna get shouted at and be forced to re-run the bag through the scanner again. I can get through with sharp metallic tools and weird unlabeled boxes with wires hanging out of them, but I can't leave my kindle in my backpack? And what about the humongous battery packs I carry? No problem having 2 or 3 of those in my bag. I guess my Macbook Air or my e-reader possess uniquely dangerous powers I don't comprehend. Even if I try to comply with the "laptops out of your bag" rule, I might still get shouted at if I place it in a container instead of right on the conveyor belt... or if I place it in a container with some other belongings next to it. Maybe the TSA stops terrorists that are as stupid as they are, which I guess is a good thing. But how good can stupid people be at catching other stupid people? Is it really worth it to waste everyone else's time and to treat them like crap in the process? Yup, not surprised that the TSA also reacts with as much stupidity to cybersecurity flaws. If I became supreme leader overnight, I would work to completely dismantle the TSA and rebuild it from scratch. There doesn't appear to be any value in that agency that can't be easily replaced with something better.

2y ago