So, did this guy just kill his career?

TMetzinger said:
This is wrong on so many levels...
You don't only have rights in regard to the State. If IBM decided to detain you on public property, or to break into your house, or other behavior, they'd have violated your rights and could face criminal and civil action.
Click to expand...

Nope. They would not have violated any of your constitutional rights. Were they to break into your house and find several pounds of cocaine, that would be fully admissible as evidence against you at trial, regardless of the fact that those who broke into your house would also be tried for B&E.
 
JeffDG said:
Nope. They would not have violated any of your constitutional rights. Were they to break into your house and find several pounds of cocaine, that would be fully admissible as evidence against you at trial, regardless of the fact that those who broke into your house would also be tried for B&E.
Click to expand...
Ah - you're talking about constitutional rights, not other rights in law. As I understand it, the constitutional rights do only protect you against the government.

But, back before TSA, the airlines were acting as agents of the government, who set the standards and practices of the private security folks. This still happens at airport that don't have a federal security workforce. In these cases the differences are negligible - the private security folks will enjoy the immunity of the government as long as they stay within the lines the government set, and they have the same responsibilities as far as your constitutional rights go.
 
alaskaflyer said:
What makes you think they disagree?
Click to expand...
Since they stay with the employer I really don't think they do disagree. I was countering the point that they may disagree but can't do anything about it.

alaskaflyer said:
What makes you think that they think it is wrong?
Click to expand...
Same thing as above. Since they choose to keep the job I can only come to the conclusion that they support what they are doing.

alaskaflyer said:
What makes our viewpoint the right one? For every bitchy airline pilot with a superiority complex and an affinity for Rand Paul campaign commercials there are ten people who frankly don't give a rat's ass about his inconveniences and dime store lawyering.
Click to expand...
The guy is a bitchy airline pilot? Really... Sigh.....
 
Thanks for the post Bill

And interesting read.

Sorry I haven't been around much - this Aviation Career of mine has been quite time consuming.

Did you by chance make the Commander Group Fly-In in Georgia? I didn't see you there (but I arrived a little late)
 
Maxmosbey said:
I don't see how this is a reflection of TSA in general. I can probably get on the internet and find instances of church secretaries stealing out of the offering plate, teachers stealing lunch money, or just about anyone stealing anything. You can find all kinds of that sort of thing. It happens. The point is, they got caught. it isn't like the TSA is hiring people and saying, "hey, while you are at it, steal everything you can get your hands on."
Click to expand...

While that is true, there is enough anecdotal evidence from a variety of markets that indicates that the TSA has a systemic problem. And that DOES reflect on the TSA in general.

Examples include:

TSA screener in DEN brings gun to workplace, gets slap on wrist but is not fired

TSA screener & LEOs at midwest airport detain passenger carrying cash from campaign rally, despite the fact that there is no limit to the amount of cash one can carry (noted that >$10K must be declared for folks leaving country).

TSA management in RIC orders airport to issue SIDA badge to convicted felon, despite the fact that issuing such a badge would be contrary to security procedures.

TSA forces woman to remove nipple ring.

TSA screener at IAD threatens passenger with detention and states that passenger has no first amendment rights when dealing with agency.

TSA LAX has passenger detained & called LEO for using NEXUS card as ID, which is on the list of acceptable IDs for security.

TSA PHL has several incidents, including inspecting checks carried by passenger and calling her husband just in case she's leaving/divorcing him.

TSA screeners leaving duty trade jokes and stories while riding bus to parking and while walking down street about passengers & exchange high-5s about harassing passengers.

Plenty more where those came from.

Systemic problems reflect on the agency as a whole. I dare say that MOST LEOs are better trained, more disciplined, and more protective of constitutional rights than are anyone in TSA (and yes, I include the air marshals after the incident involving signs posted in the break room).

If it were the occasional 'bad apple', that would be one thing. A plethora of cases that indicate systemic issues is an animal of a whole different color.

I'm not opposed to reasonable screening procedures - but the US TSA attitude is much less civil than that practiced in many other parts of the world.
 
I have not read all of this thread, so I am sure I am repeating previous sentiments. This pilot is a whole lot more than just a pilot, he is a true patriot. He looked the bureaucrats in the face and said Hell no.

Perhaps if more of us would quit emulating sheep, this nonsense in the name of "security" would end.

John
 
wsuffa said:
While that is true, there is enough anecdotal evidence from a variety of markets that indicates that the TSA has a systemic problem. And that DOES reflect on the TSA in general.

Examples include:

TSA screener in DEN brings gun to workplace, gets slap on wrist but is not fired

TSA screener & LEOs at midwest airport detain passenger carrying cash from campaign rally, despite the fact that there is no limit to the amount of cash one can carry (noted that >$10K must be declared for folks leaving country).

TSA management in RIC orders airport to issue SIDA badge to convicted felon, despite the fact that issuing such a badge would be contrary to security procedures.

TSA forces woman to remove nipple ring.

TSA screener at IAD threatens passenger with detention and states that passenger has no first amendment rights when dealing with agency.

TSA LAX has passenger detained & called LEO for using NEXUS card as ID, which is on the list of acceptable IDs for security.

TSA PHL has several incidents, including inspecting checks carried by passenger and calling her husband just in case she's leaving/divorcing him.

TSA screeners leaving duty trade jokes and stories while riding bus to parking and while walking down street about passengers & exchange high-5s about harassing passengers.

Plenty more where those came from.

Systemic problems reflect on the agency as a whole. I dare say that MOST LEOs are better trained, more disciplined, and more protective of constitutional rights than are anyone in TSA (and yes, I include the air marshals after the incident involving signs posted in the break room).

If it were the occasional 'bad apple', that would be one thing. A plethora of cases that indicate systemic issues is an animal of a whole different color.

I'm not opposed to reasonable screening procedures - but the US TSA attitude is much less civil than that practiced in many other parts of the world.
Click to expand...

They're dogs, every one of them. Dirty dogs. Dogs dogs dogs. They're all dogs. Their wives and kids are dogs too. Even their dogs are dogs.

There, are you happy? :thumbsup:
 
Maxmosbey said:
They're dogs, every one of them. Dirty dogs. Dogs dogs dogs. They're all dogs. Their wives and kids are dogs too. Even their dogs are dogs.

There, are you happy? :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Don't think I said that at all. I pointed to systemic problems, not individuals. I'll also point to policy problems. Perhaps you'd agree that *if* senior management set bad policy (or unconstitutional policy) at the top of the organization then the folks at the bottom are pretty much bound to follow.

"I was just following orders, sir" a/k/a the Nuremberrg Defense. (I didn't mean to Godwin the thread...)
 
jesse said:
Since they stay with the employer I really don't think they do disagree. I was countering the point that they may disagree but can't do anything about it.


Same thing as above. Since they choose to keep the job I can only come to the conclusion that they support what they are doing.
Click to expand...

Same with the airline pilot.

The guy is a bitchy airline pilot? Really... Sigh.....
Click to expand...

Seemed pretty bitchy to me :shrug: If he doesn't support the current aviation security structure in which he plays a part he can do the same as unhappy TSA employees, and decamp. No?
 
wsuffa said:
"I was just following orders, sir" a/k/a the Nuremberrg Defense. (I didn't mean to Godwin the thread...)
Click to expand...

Captian Henry Wirz (commander of the Andersonville (Camp Sumter) POW camp) use of that defense somewhat predates WW-II. So there is no need to invoke Nazi's.
 
alaskaflyer said:
Same with the airline pilot.



Seemed pretty bitchy to me :shrug: If he doesn't support the current aviation security structure in which he os a part he can do the same as unhappy TSA employees, and decamp. No?
Click to expand...
Seems to me that's what he is doing. He stood his ground.
 
Where I once worked (before retirement) we would get periodically "audited" by INPO, the "Institute for Nuclear Power Operations."

Their findings were, of course, a snapshot--just a snapshot. But those snapshots were taken seriously by the Federales, in the form of the NRC. So we always had to be on our best behavior when they were there. Of course, to ensure that we weren't going to slip while they were there, we trained and tried to operate as though they were there all the time. It's a lot easier to smile for a group portrait if you smile all the time.

Point is, all these anecdotes point to a pervasive culture within TSA. Is it a positive or negative culture? That is that basic question.

The other question goes back to the meaning of the words in those pesky Amendments. Unfortunately, SCOTUS has seen fit of late to use some really weird reading glasses when perusing the Constitution and its amendments, beginning with, e.g., Wickard (1942), wherein growing wheat for oneself and family, farm and friends was "Interstate Commerce." Then there was Smith v. Employment Division (1990, if I recall) which said that religious freedom is not absolute. Then we all know Kelo v. New London (2005) where more tax revenue is a "public good." Finally, my favorite (and one germane to this topic) is Board of Ed. of Potawatomie Cty. v. Earls (2002), wherein kids who might take showers together, as on a road trip, or after a football game have voluntarily, with full consent, abdicated their privacy rights. That's where we are stuck nowadays.

Sigh.
 
DutchessFlier said:
By the way: They just arrested a bunch of TSA screeners at Newark Liberty who were stealing cash from carry-ons, etc. that were hand screened in addition to the scanners. Story said they were grabbing between $400 and $700 each shift and dividing up the spoils.

More to follow...you can't make this stuff up people....
Click to expand...

Oh, please. I don't believe that for a second. They are sworn to protect our safety from the dreaded terrorists. They wouldn't steal from honest Americans.


B)
 
flyersfan31 said:
Oh, please. I don't believe that for a second. They are sworn to protect our safety from the dreaded terrorists. They wouldn't steal from honest Americans.


B)
Click to expand...

Actually they aren't sworn to do anything of the sort ;) I don't think they are sworn to do anything.
 
jesse said:
Seems to me that's what he is doing. He stood his ground.
Click to expand...

Indeed. And was shown the door. And is likely to be shown the door in a more permanent manner soon I suspect.

I guess everything worked out. He will no longer have to worry about it.
 
alaskaflyer said:
Actually they aren't sworn to do anything of the sort ;) I don't think they are sworn to do anything.
Click to expand...

Actually, like all federal employees, they swear an oath - here it is, right from OPM:
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
 
TMetzinger said:
Actually, like all federal employees, they swear an oath - here it is, right from OPM:
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Click to expand...

Well yes, I was thinking of the more common use of the term "sworn" employees. Sorry.
 
alaskaflyer said:
Well yes, I was thinking of the more common use of the term "sworn" employees. Sorry.
Click to expand...

What the hell do they get that fancy gold shield on their spiffy blue uni's if they haven't at least sworn to do something???? I mean, is that just decoration? 'Cause I'm pretty upset if those are just for decoration!
 
flyersfan31 said:
What the hell do they get that fancy gold shield on their spiffy blue uni's if they haven't at least sworn to do something???? I mean, is that just decoration? 'Cause I'm pretty upset if those are just for decoration!
Click to expand...

What do Wackamole Security personnel swear to? Besides upholding the corporation's bottom line, that is?
 

Attachments

  • WackenhutBadge.jpg
    WackenhutBadge.jpg
    69.3 KB · Views: 19
flyersfan31 said:
What the hell do they get that fancy gold shield on their spiffy blue uni's if they haven't at least sworn to do something???? I mean, is that just decoration? 'Cause I'm pretty upset if those are just for decoration!
Click to expand...
Yes, it is just decoration that plays on the public's ignorance. TSA initially didn't have those shields and police style uniforms; they received them later in 2008 to make them look more authoritative.

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2008-06-15-tsa-badges_N.htm

Apparently, real police officers haven't been happy about this at all. Quite ironic :)

-Felix
 
TMetzinger said:
Actually, like all federal employees, they swear an oath - here it is, right from OPM:
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Click to expand...

Trivia question...there's one exception to the above...
 
JeffDG said:
Trivia question...there's one exception to the above...
Click to expand...

I think federal judges have a different oath, or maybe have to take two oaths.

I sometimes wonder why the oaths aren't taken more seriously, for example, when elected officials, for political reasons, sponsor legislation that they know won't pass constitutional muster. I've even heard legislators say in public, "Let the courts worry about the Constitution."

In my opinion, the legislative sponsor(s) of any bill that is later found to be unconstitutional in any regard should be, at a minimum, removed from office, permanently debarred from holding public employment, and stripped of their pensions. (Tarring and feathering would actually be my preferred course of action in such cases, but it seems to have fallen out of favor.)

-Rich
 
flyersfan31 said:
What the hell do they get that fancy gold shield on their spiffy blue uni's if they haven't at least sworn to do something???? I mean, is that just decoration? 'Cause I'm pretty upset if those are just for decoration!
Click to expand...

As a screener once said to a passenger: "you will respect my authoritay"....
 
flyersfan31 said:
What the hell do they get that fancy gold shield on their spiffy blue uni's if they haven't at least sworn to do something???? I mean, is that just decoration? 'Cause I'm pretty upset if those are just for decoration!
Click to expand...


Yep -- there is no prohibition to buying a uniform and as many steenkin badges as fancy and as shiny as you can afford and wearing the mess.

You may face "impersonating" charges -- but you may not.
 
By it's a good thing they canned that pilot. Imagine, him getting on an airplane without screening! He could bring a bomb or weapon and hijack himself.
 
steingar said:
By it's a good thing they canned that pilot. Imagine, him getting on an airplane without screening! He could bring a bomb or weapon and hijack himself.
Click to expand...
The other day as I sat (and sat and sat) waiting for my flight out of Washington National, I observed someone in a pilot uniform come down the stairs from the jetway and walk around inspecting the aircraft with full access to all of the non-screened ramp personnel! Then he went back up to the aircraft without any re-screening!!!. Anyone of them could have slipped him a weapon or a bottle of water:hairraise::hairraise::hairraise:
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
The other day as I sat (and sat and sat) waiting for my flight out of Washington National, I observed someone in a pilot uniform come down the stairs from the jetway and walk around inspecting the aircraft with full access to all of the non-screened ramp personnel! Then he went back up to the aircraft without any re-screening!!!. Anyone of them could have slipped him a weapon or a bottle of water:hairraise::hairraise::hairraise:
Click to expand...

... or a file to sharpen the fire ax already in the cockpit.
 
dmccormack said:
Yep -- there is no prohibition to buying a uniform and as many steenkin badges as fancy and as shiny as you can afford and wearing the mess.

You may face "impersonating" charges -- but you may not.
Click to expand...

Do the TSA agents get rated on their "flair"?

edit: "flair" not "bling" dang....
 
Last edited:
alaskaflyer said:
What do Wackamole Security personnel swear to? Besides upholding the corporation's bottom line, that is?
Click to expand...

I remember the stink they made (TSA) about their embroidered badges. How much money did we sink into those new, improved uniforms? The ones with the spiffy, Wackenhut-style badges?

Sigh.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
The other day as I sat (and sat and sat) waiting for my flight out of Washington National, I observed someone in a pilot uniform come down the stairs from the jetway and walk around inspecting the aircraft with full access to all of the non-screened ramp personnel! Then he went back up to the aircraft without any re-screening!!!. Anyone of them could have slipped him a weapon or a bottle of water:hairraise::hairraise::hairraise:
Click to expand...

Waitaminute... Aren't the ramp personnel screened?

Actually - Now that I think about it - The line guys at MSN who fuel the airplanes come from the GA side of the airport.

But it's OK. They have a badge. :rolleyes2:
 
Ah yes, TSA personnel... Several of my patients have become that... They were on Medicaid up to that point... The one lady had several divorces, children with multiple fathers, never had a paying job in her life, and VOILA - she now has a uniform and a shiny gold badge, and an attitude... Gawd help anyone who does not respect HER author itay...

denny-o
 
Dr. O said:
Ah yes, TSA personnel... Several of my patients have become that... They were on Medicaid up to that point... The one lady had several divorces, children with multiple fathers, never had a paying job in her life, and VOILA - she now has a uniform and a shiny gold badge, and an attitude... Gawd help anyone who does not respect HER author itay...

denny-o
Click to expand...

How dare you inpugn the integrity of the TSA workforce???!!!!!!



:rolleyes:
 
Article in a New York newspaper today says that the head of DHS (Napolitano) refused to go through the strip-search machine.

That's telling.
 
"The Detroit News and Detroit Free Press report the couple was caught on camera and arrested for breaching security"

This has me wondering, is "breaching security" a felony or a misdemeanor? Was that one of the commandments on those stones Moses lugged down from the mountain? "Thou shalt not breach security" I wonder if that was before or after the one about coveting your neighbors wife?

Perhaps there will soon be a TV series about "breaching security". Cops and security breachers. Kids will play cops and security breachers probably after the series gets going.

So, are security breachers more of a threat to society than say someone charged with robbing a bank, or charging usury fees to borrowers?

Should security breachers be required to wear a GPS ankle bracelet?

Did Congress make security breaching a crime, or was it state or local lawmakers?

I can see it now, the inmates at Pelican Bay asking the new guy what he is in for. Better steer clear of that guy, he's in for security breaching.

I wonder if they will have a web site set up so people can see if there are any security breachers living near them? :)

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top