Skip to main content

The TSA - on the Horns of a Dilemma

The Transportation Security Agency (TSA) is on the horns of a dilemma, and a big one it is.

In the early days after 2001, just after the TSA was created, a huge corps of highly zealous officers was recruited to monitor those boarding our airlines. (Similar screening is now in place worldwide.)  They looked for the slightest violations in the rules.  Any breach meant the perpetrator would be awarded a thorough search.   Taken aside in front of all travelers, the "perp" was given quite a thorough going over.  With over 50,000 employees the TSA faces formidable problems.

Forget to remove your shoes, you were searched; forget to remove your belt, you were searched; forget to remove your computer (horror-of-horrors), you were searched.  That is, you were taken aside and given a careful inspection.  But there is more, there were the pat-downs, sometimes bordering on sexual assault. People complained, and in large numbers.  More was involved in the general search for bombers.  The process was supposed to be random, and there were also those of us, me many times, that endured the careful search for no apparent reason.  In the eyes of the TSA, I suppose it was thought to be something of a deterrent.  Then came grannies-in-a-wheelchair and the granddaughters of age five.  When these folks were searched, patted down and otherwise semi-molested, the events made the national news. Of course, the TSA agents use hermetically sanitized rubber gloves.

Profiling of more the likely suspects was completely disallowed.  It still is.

The TSA, under a barrage of complaints and pressure, decided to become more humane. The consequence has been a drastic diminution of such granny and little girl searches.  Until now, when in the current situation, the TSA relies mostly on their technological scanning devises.  Just the other day in flying to DC, of all places, I forgot to remove my computer from the case.  The TSA caught this and simply asked me to please wait while they rescanned the computer and bag separately.  What?  No search?  The other day when being scanned, I had forgotten to remove a quarter from my pocket.  They caught it, and when I showed it to the TSA agent, he said no problem and to proceed to my gate.  No search?  Then, when entering the scanning machine, I had forgotten to remove my belt.  I offered to remove it immediately.  "No problem," was the response.  No search?  I rarely, any more, see people remove little bottles of this or that from their luggage and place them in clear plastic bags for separate scanning.

It's been a long while since I've seen one of our poor citizens, or senior citizens, or even children pulled aside for one of the TSA patented pat-downs.  So, it occurred to me, what's happened?  And then it came to me.  First, the TSA can't profile, which evidence shows would work. Second, the TSA gets many complaints and horrible PR for their dedicated pat-downs.  Thus, they have found themselves on the horns of a dilemma.  That is, they can't do anything unless there is incontrovertible evidence in one of their scans that something is really amiss.

My conclusion is we are seriously at risk for any clever terrorist who wishes to take a gamble.*  Or could it be that terrorists are waiting for a "lull" in scrutiny?

The TSA directives have been compromised by political correctness on the one side the coin, and compromised by public opinion (and the news) on the other.  Let us hope and pray, the TSA electronic devises are up to the challenge.

* An apprehended terrorist should always be given the maximum penalty allowed by law.  These people are intent on  murder with no purpose other than to murder as many as possible. There can be no allowances for a first offense, no mitigating circumstances, no credits for good behavior. 

Suicide terrorists are nothing more than contract killers with an ecclesiastical contract and having an arbitrary target. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behavioral Science and Problem-Solving

I.                                       I.                 Introduction.                Concerning our general behavior, it’s high about time we all had some understanding of how we operate on ourselves, and it is just as important how we are operated on by others. This is the wheelhouse of behavioral sciences. It is a vast subject. It touches our lives constantly. It’s influence is pervasive and can be so subtle we never notice it. Behavioral sciences profoundly affect our ability and success at problem-solving, from the elementary level to highly complex wicked problems. This is discussed in Section IV. We begin with the basics of behavioral sciences, Section II, and then through the lens of multiple categories and examples, Section III. II.     ...

UNCERTAINTY IS CERTAIN

  Uncertainty is Certain G. Donald Allen 12/12/2024 1.       Introduction . This short essay is about uncertainty in people from both secular and nonsecular viewpoints. One point that will emerge is that randomly based uncertainty can be a driver for religious structure. Many groups facing uncertainty about their future are deeply religious or rely on faith as a source of comfort, resilience, and guidance. The intersection of uncertainty and religiosity often stems from the human need to find meaning, hope, and stability in the face of unpredictable or challenging circumstances. We first take up the connections of uncertainty to religion for the first real profession, farming, noting that hunting has many similar uncertainties. Below are groups that commonly lean on religious beliefs amidst uncertainty.   This short essay is a follow-up to a previous piece on certainty (https://used-ideas.blogspot.com/2024/12/certainty-is-also-emotion.html). U...

Robin Hood and Cliven Bundy

  Actor Herbert Mundin, playing Munch in the 1938 film The Adventures of Robin Hood (starring Errol Flynn) is charged by Prince John's troops of slaying a royal deer in the royal Sherwood forest.  The punishment is death.  Though the events of this film are a portrayal of events dating to the 15th century, they became by the 19th century a "robbing from the rich for the poor" theme so often depicted in other film genres. The William Tell legend is another. The plot is simple.  A poor man desperate to survive tastes the forbidden fruits owned by the authority, and is condemned. I would love to hear this event debated on the current TV news shows.  On the one hand, Munch would be a champion in service to his family.  On the other hand, his legal rights are restricted by legal authority. so, the argument would proceed.  Legal scholars cite statutes chapter and verse, while others would root for the common man.  Fast forward to 2014. Parallels ...