Airport security check

From the responses here, some by persons very familiar with the testing equipment, it sounds like the only conclusive result of explosives testing is that the equipment is conclusively unreliable. If the equipment causes inconveniences without a reliable result, then why exactly is it still in use/relied upon? Do the terrorists have some unreasonable fear of testing equipment that sounds about as reliable as a coin toss? If so, maybe we should just give the TSA people some old fake geiger counters from the movies that beep when activated/told to beep. Maybe we could just label those fake geiger counters "100% reliable terrorist detectors"?

This seems like a waste of my tax dollars and travellers' time.
 
I'm not sure i agree Chaz88. I mean, if that logic were followed on through to where such logic progresses when left unchecked, all fliers would fly naked, unconcious, handcuffed, and at the point of a federal officer's firearm, at least until it was determined that non-governmental, non-military travel was a risk not worth taking.

In my opinion, risk and reward must be taken into account when making policy that affects such a large and diverse group.

It sounds like either better detecting equipment is needed to replace what sounds like a quasi-ritualistic charade of "testing" or a cost-savings program to streamline TSA explosive-detecting procedures by eliminating them should be considered.

Is there better explosives detection equipment available?
 
I agree with you to a point. But if they stop one airplane bombing, even just because they exist, it is worth it.
Click to expand...
Is it really? How many planes have the Israelis lost since their security procedures went into effect. Instead of relying solely on untried and fallible technology improving the standard quality of TSA employees and adopting the Israeli procedures including their improved profiling techniques might serve us better.

I saw a monsignor get tackled in St. Louis because the cleats on his heels set off the metal alarm and he was rushing because he thought we were going to be late for our flight. He was cleared alright but I had to sit next to him all the way to Milwaukee and it was not a pleasant trip. Apparently the old boy had no sense of humor.
 
Don't confuse false positives with unreliable.
As a percentage of bags screened, false alarms are uncommon.
False positives are irrelevant if they are few enough to not effect operations.
False NEGATIVES are a problem. The machines are thoroughly tested to make sure they beep when it counts. That's all that really matters.

On the matter of Behaviour Detection, which is the basis for the Isreali system, yes, it's better. Probably better in almost every way. TSA has made slow, small steps in that direction. It's still a long way from being the basis of our system though.
 
Don't confuse false positives with unreliable.
As a percentage of bags screened, false alarms are uncommon.
False positives are irrelevant if they are few enough to not effect operations.
False NEGATIVES are a problem. The machines are thoroughly tested to make sure they beep when it counts. That's all that really matters.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. If the machine routinely alerts to non-existant threats, then the machine is the electronic version of the "boy who cried wolf" and is likely to lead to errors in judgement by those tasked with interpreting the machine's "alerts". Those who have to search bags "alerted" on by the questionalby accurate machines will not be as careful in their searching; the machines are using Pavlovian training to turn the bag searchers' job into a ritual with no glaring risk.

I once conducted an audit in a building being remodeled. The very expensive and expansive fire detection system malfunctioned by sounding "fire alarms" a few times each hour for several days that i was working there. After the first couple of alarms, i no longer worried about choking on smoke or dashed for the exit. I consider regular false-positive responses on diagnostic equipment to be characteristic of unreliable equipment (barring other errors).
 
The ways things are done makes that a non problem. It involves too much operational detail for discussion but false positives do not create a "boy who cried wolf" situation. It's not something that happens every few hours every day. I went days, maybe weeks without seeing alarms.
I would say they do they opposite, if anything. "Been there, done that, know how to proceed" rather than "Oh crap! An alarm! We're all going to die! What do I do?!"
It's an alarm. The next steps are known and rehearsed. Who needs to know? What gets documented? What happens next? Pavlovian, maybe, which kind of insures that it's done right.
 
This isn't airport, this happened on an internatioal ferry between WA and BC. Guy drove his newly aquired used car onto the ferry. Bomb sniffing dog allerted on this car, guy (unfortunately for him, of middle eastern origin), locked down, guy taken to jail, car completely disassembled...nothing found...I don't remember how long the guy was in jail, but it was weeks,,,made for a good law civil rights suit anyway...

what had happened, the person that had owned the car previous had transported ammonium nitrate fertilizer in the car before he sold it. Absolutely stupid and unlawful response from TSA.
 
Recently I had to travel to attend my wife's high school reunion. I am a former Federal Agent and a current NRA Instructor. I also have a spinal cord stimulator implanted in my body and much like a pacemaker, cannot go thru the magnotrometer at the airport...I must have a pat down scan.

Without thinking, I wore my Instructor Belt which is also my holster belt. At the end of the pat down, the TSA Agent ran his gloves for explosive powder in that little machine they use. It tested positive. I was immediately escorted into a private area and several more TSA Agents joined us. I showed them my Federal ID and my Instructor ID but it carried little weight. I was subjected to a more intense examination of what was under my clothing and I had to show them the implant which can be seen as a lump under the skin. Oddly enough, my Federal ID, when active, authorized me to carry a firearm aboard a airliner.

I wasn't very thrilled about the ordeal but when you think about it, I am happy to know that the TSA is being that careful. I have always thought the current airport security operation is nothing more than a dog and pony show to make the flying public feel safe. No terrorist with a brain is going to try to come thru the front door with this type of security. When the next attack happens, it will be a 'trusted" employee that plants something in the baggage compartment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top