USA Flag

Official website of the Department of Homeland Security

Transportation Security Administration

In-Line Baggage Screening: Increased Security and Convenience

Archived Content

Please note that older content is archived for public record. This page may contain information that is outdated and may not reflect current policy or programs.

If you have questions about policies or procedures, please contact the TSA Contact Center.

Members of the news media may contact TSA Public Affairs.

Tuesday, December 09, 2008
luggage

Most Americans know that all checked luggage is required to go through screening before it goes onto the plane, but what happens behind the scenes? One of two types of screening systems are being used at airports across the country. “Stand-alone” inspection systems can often be found in the public lobby of an airport terminal near the airline check-in counters—although they are sometimes installed in locations outside of public view. These labor-intensive systems are typically used in small airports or in specific zones with low baggage volumes.
 

 


“In-Line” inspection systems, unlike their stand-alone counterparts, use heavily automated networks of Explosive Detection Systems (EDS) able to handle thousands of bags each hour at busy airports. More than half of the 2 million people that fly each day go through airports with in-line baggage screening systems.

These systems use conveyor belts to automatically screen, sort, and track baggage. Multiple EDS machines are linked to a centralized control room and several “resolution rooms.” When a bag triggers an alarm, the bag’s image is transmitted to the resolution room where trained officers determine whether a physical inspection is warranted.

If a physical inspection is required, the bag is routed via conveyor belt to an inspection area where TSA officers screen the contents of the bag while under constant supervision by closed circuit TV. A notice is placed inside each bag that is physically examined indicating an inspection took place. If there’s a problem afterward, the CCTV footage can be used to determine if a particular bag was indeed hand-searched and by whom. Once an alarm is resolved, the bag is placed back on the conveyor belt and sent on its way to the plane.

Other benefits of this technology: since the in-line system is heavily automated, the number of physical injuries sustained by officers due to lifting baggage is reduced, TSA can track each and every bag throughout the process.

To learn more about how in-line baggage systems work, check out this link .
 

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous on

Posting of comments seem broken in posts of 2008-11-24 and older.

If this is policy decision, it is a conflicts with Bob's post-9/11/2008 moderation policy of directing off-topic comments to old posts--old posts are closed.

If it is merely a problem with these bloggers operating their blogging software, that seems on par for TSA's general level of excellence.

Submitted by Yangj08 on

Responding to various Anonymous comments-
"Questions that are either none of the persons concern"
Um, no. It is never "none of the persons concern" when they want to know just what it takes to get past security without harrassment.
"or questions that have been answered over and over, but no one likes the answer"
Think long and hard about why the "answer" is not appreciated. It usually has to do with the fact that it is contradicted in daily operation or a non-answer.
"Half the time they are not even worthy of an answer."
Also, no. As a government agency the TSA does have an obligation to answer questions asked of it by the public to a satisfactory degree barring SSI (and I have my questions about the use of this designation, but it'll have to stand for now). There is no right to this kind of judgement ever when acting in official capacity.

"Because a terrorist can not sit down in a wheel chair and pretend like they are handycap and in pain. Right!"
Right! Let's throw out the baby with the bathwater! And it's spelled "handIcapped"!

"Everyone can leave the word harrassment out of their statements because you obviously have no idea what the goal of security is."
On the contrary- been through security in Japan? Notice any differences? Consistency in policy between airports is one; rapid implementation of screening technologies (such as for liquids) is another.

"I have not visited for a few months.....it is as if I never left. The same knuckleheads are still asking the same questions."
"Knuckleheads"? Really?

Submitted by Anonymous on
Your right, poor souls. Because a terrorist can not sit down in a wheel chair and pretend like they are handycap and in pain. Right!
Or a person with bad intentions can not hide a dangerous item on their elderly parent or handycap child. People do these things you know.
If they are sick enough to hurt other people, it usually does not matter if it is someone that they know or don't know.
There is no harrassment going on at the checkpoints. None! There are sick people out there. You can not look at someone and tell if they are worthy of hurting another human being.
There is no profiling of young or old, of handycap or not.
Everyone can leave the word harrassment out of their statements because you obviously have no idea what the goal of security is.

I had a kidney removed. When flying through O'hare a TSO wanded me and found 30 + staples holding the fresh incision closed (incision around 12 inches long). He wanted to remove the translucent dressing to see if there was anything underneath. The TSO was screaming at my, already angry wife to STAND BACK. I think the only thing that kept him from removing the translucent dressing was the fact I was about to puke all over him. I view that as harassment and potentially life threatening. You can come down off of your high horse now.
Submitted by Anonymous on

The prohibition of the moist is silly as long as you don't have a similar program for solids. 3oz of RDX is a heck of a lot more dangerous, cheap, and concealable than a toothpaste.

From your actions we can know that "security and convenience" that TSA is interested in is job security and convenience for your employees.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Your right, poor souls. Because a terrorist can not sit down in a wheel chair and pretend like they are handycap and in pain. Right!
Or a person with bad intentions can not hide a dangerous item on their elderly parent or handycap child. People do these things you know."

How many terrorists using wheelchairs has TSA caught? How many terrorists, period, has TSA caught? The answer to both questions is zero.

And, of course, it bears repeating: No one saying there should be no security at airports. What we want is smart security, proportionate to the actual risks to aircraft and passengers -- risks which are very, very small.

Your statement that there's "no harassment" at checkpoints is patently false, as dozens of well-documented cases of TSO abuse and misconduct attest.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Of course, now we're going to have to put our shoes in checked luggage - something about them being weapons now. And that's a $25 windfall to the airlines for every passenger who wasn't going to check anything before.

Submitted by Robert Johnson on
Quote from Anonymous: "Please note the word OVERSEAS.

The question you responded to was about domestic travel.

So is it required that travelers with more than $10,000 in cash who are traveling in-country be reported?"

Actually's it's not TSA's concern regardless of traveling domestically or overseas. The customs declaration for carrying cash valuing over $10k US is a customs issue only.

I'd still like to see where TSA claims legal authority to examine cash, where it's carried and why without any statutory authority to do so.

Quote from an Anonymous TSO/TSA apologist: "alid questions! Ha! The questions are ignored because there are hardly valid questions asked. It is the same questions over and over. Questions that are either none of the persons concern or questions that have been answered over and over, but no one likes the answer. Oh and a lot of the questions are very ignorant! Half the time they are not even worthy of an answer. You compainers believe that your questions have not been answered since you do not like the answer you have been given. I'm telling you this blog is a waist!"

First off, a nonanswer to a question is not an answer. So yeah, people aren't going to like that answer because the question hasn't been answered.

"Because" isn't answer. "Because we say so" isn't an answer.

Questions have been asked. TSA refuses to answer for the most part. When it does answer, the answers are nonanswers which warrant further questions. Those questions are ignored.

So if you see the same question asked repeatedly, it's probably because TSA either ignored the question or gave a nonanswer. Neither is acceptable.

If you really believe there is no harassment going on at checkpoints, please travel thru the following places without any TSA credentials and tell me that there's no harassment going on: DFW, EWR, DCA, IAD, and BWI, to name a few. DFW and EWR have particularly bad reputations.

I really think many TSO's don't travel as normal people to see what the flying public sees. Many only see what happens at their own checkpoints.

Go out and see the world and see what's happening out there ... you just might be surprised.

Robert
Submitted by Anonymous on

I found only one post dated 12/15 and that was on the "Roundtable" article.
Surely more submissions have been made than one lonely post.

Please state again what the censors are using for guidelines please!

What is the purpose of this blog if TSA will not answer questions and then limits beyond reason readers submissions?

Submitted by Earl Pitts on

"I have not visited for a few months.....it is as if I never left. The same knuckleheads are still asking the same questions."

And TSA's still not answering them.

Yep, nothing's changed.

Earl

Submitted by Anonymous on

So, Terminal 4, 9000 room is not an issue? Remember, if 25% of all TSOs leave per year, its going to be a good book. True Leadership, not in-line.

Submitted by Ungureanu Ioan on

The physical inspection idea and inspection by closed circuit TV are obsolete. I think the only enhancement in the system is semi-automate mechanism. Also there are some in-line weak points, remember if there are similar bags with similar aspect with similar content, and one, only one has a different weight difference and contains bad things? I think the screening technologies must evolve more to provide detailed information. But, well, generally it is a welcome improvement.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Free Hint to TSA: If the operators don't know how to work your equipment, it really shows. Especially when it is on national TV.

This is especially important to remember if there is some beancounter in management who thinks that a TSO can be thrown to the wolves with no training.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Your right. There is no restraint. If TSA personel believe a law has been broken why would that not be of any TSA's concern? and more specificly a federal law(The Bank Secrecy Act). TSA is not law enforcement. You will never be arrested by a TSO. What is the concern here? Everybody has the right to report to law enforcement when they believe the law has been broken. Why should TSA not have this right? What good would they be if they couldn't?

Glad to see this discussion moving foward.

December 12, 2008 5:25 PM

............................
Well you bring up the BSA law. Please point to the section that says it is a crime that must be reported to a LEO if a person has $10k or more on their person and enter/pass through a TSA checkpoint.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

Submitted by Sandra on

HappyToHelp wrote:

"Anonymous said...
Are we to take from your rephrasing of the question and your response to yourself, that the TSA has the authority to "report" people who are not doing anything illegal?

Read the above example. You are "reported" every time you are found to have a liquid that exceeds the 311 rule."

1. It was not Anonymous who wrote that, it was Sandra.

2. I asked if people who are not doing anything illegal, i.e., carrying >$10,000 cash domestically, are reported. Your response did not address that issue.

If you are "HappyToHelp" please, at least, get your information correct.

Submitted by Sandra on

Anonymous wrote in response to my question about the "secret" letters:

"Why would you expect TSA to fix this little problem when they cannot (will not) fix any number of problems inside TSA?

Heck, they won't even talk back to the participants here on the blog."

I totally agree. The failure to run something as simple as a blog efficiently and effectively is a symptom of the overall uselessness of the TSA.

Submitted by HappyToHelp on
Anonymous said...
So you think a person has no need, right or ability to question a decision that they think may be in error. Is that right? No recourse other than to not fly or to have their property confiscated.

Sorry, I disagree.

Another reason TSA must be terminated!

Sorry I disagree with both of you!!

You have lots of recourse. The supervisor is just the beginning.

at checkpoint:

1.Have the supervisor call his boss "the check point screening manager". Keap calling for a boss untell they decline and take the name of the last person you spoke with.

2.Call law enforcement... they can mediate most problems.

not at checkpoint:
1.Got Feedback

2.Ton's of contact info

3.SF-95

4. Get a lawyer and file suit.
Submitted by Anonymous on

HappyToHelp spouted some nonsense:

"There are no secret laws."

You sir, do not know what you are talking about.

Review Gilmore vs. Gonzales

Find the transcripts or CSPAN footage from the government hearing on:

"Secret Law and the Threat to Democratic and Accountable Government"

Or just Google "secret laws"

Or don't bother.

Why let facts and reality get in the way of your condescending remarks?

Submitted by Anonymous on

HappyToHelp said...
Anonymous said...
So you think a person has no need, right or ability to question a decision that they think may be in error. Is that right? No recourse other than to not fly or to have their property confiscated.

Sorry, I disagree.

Another reason TSA must be terminated!

Sorry I disagree with both of you!!

You have lots of recourse. The supervisor is just the beginning.

at checkpoint:

1.Have the supervisor call his boss "the check point screening manager". Keap calling for a boss untell they decline and take the name of the last person you spoke with.

2.Call law enforcement... they can mediate most problems.

not at checkpoint:
1.Got Feedback

2.Ton's of contact info

3.SF-95

4. Get a lawyer and file suit.

December 16, 2008 8:14 PM

regarding your last three options, property has been confiscated and will not be returned no matter what else happens.

That equals no recourse.

Submitted by HappyToHelp on

Anonymous said...(in poor taste)
You sir, do not know what you are talking about.

Review Gilmore vs. Gonzales

"That's what John Gilmore wanted to know. At San Francisco's airport, just like the rest of the country's airports, there was a sign that began "A Notice From the Federal Aviation Administration" and includes the sentence "passengers must present identification upon initial check-in."

I think its rather odd how the FAA would post signs about secret laws. How is that keeping it secret. Also, Gilmore was not charged with anything.... because.. ding ding... he did not break the law or a law. He also lost... go figure.

source:Gilmore Vs. Gonzales

Anonymous said...
That equals no recourse.

Only if you don't use your options do you have no recourse. You got a good answer. Its okay not to like it.

Sandra said...
1. It was not Anonymous who wrote that, it was Sandra.

Sorry Sandra... made a mistake. Just don't say I was discrimination :p

I asked if people who are not doing anything illegal, i.e., carrying >$10,000 cash domestically, are reported. Your response did not address that issue.

Here is a short and sweat answer. If any TSA personel believe you are breaking the law you will be reported to law enforcement.

Anonymous said...
Well you bring up the BSA law. Please point to the section that says it is a crime that must be reported to a LEO if a person has $10k or more on their person and enter/pass through a TSA checkpoint.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

Hey thanks for waiting.

Currency Reporting

If you have any futhor questions about transporting your money just write to U.S. Customs Service or call this phone number

U.S. Customs Service
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229
Telephone (202) 927-1520

If you are worried about traveling with large sums of money through a TSA checkpoint then check this link out.

Traveling with Special Items

Does this work. I can say yes from personel experience.

Submitted by HappyToHelp on
Anonymous said...
You sir, do not know what you are talking about.

Sure do my condescending friend.
Systems, measures, or procedures -- SSI(well documented on this site and others)
laws and regulations -- on the books(TSA provides links... check post above)
executive orders at the checkpoint -- ask the president (in reference to "Secret Law and the Threat to Democratic and Accountable Government")

If you want me to comment on Gilmore vs. Gonzales its not going to happen. The blog team has beaten that dead horse many times and I have read many opions of it here and on flyer talk(name dropping woot woot).

Anonymous said...
regarding your last three options, property has been confiscated and will not be returned no matter what else happens.

True. The government will only offer money back. Of course I'm not sure of the peticular issue that you are having as you are anonymous and have not stated on this thread what problem you are having with the redress system. If your having problems or need help just post your question. This blog is hooked up to HQ.
Submitted by HappyToHelp on

Here is something new for the discussion on traveling with cash.

quoted from "AFSD-Law Enforcement
CAREER GUIDE"
2. Liaison to Local, State, and Federal Law Enforcement Agencies
m) Develops or establishes procedures to notify, as appropriate, Law Enforcement agencies, important information including when passenger cash limits are exceeded (i.e. $10k)

This should lead you guys in the right direction on who to talk to in regards to the cash issue.

hope this helps

source: AFSD-Law Enforcement
CAREER GUIDE

Submitted by Phil on

Someone asked:

"Please point to the section that says it is a crime that must be reported to a LEO if a person has $10k or more on their person and enter/pass through a TSA checkpoint.

"Go ahead, I'll wait."

Unhelpfully, someone replied:

"Hey thanks for waiting.

Currency Reporting"

The TSA "Currency Reporting" page says nothing about limits of currency that may be carried through a TSA checkpoint, only that $10,000 or more must be reported if it is to be taken into or out of the United States.

Why is TSA, who exists to enhance transportation security, wasting time counting money they find on people en route to domestic flights?

--
Phil
Add your own questions at TSAFAQ.net

Submitted by Anonymous on
If your having problems or need help just post your question. This blog is hooked up to HQ.

And HQ will ignore them, just as they've done with all other questions posted here.
Submitted by Mr Gel-pack on

HappyToHelp @"
1.Have the supervisor call his boss "the check point screening manager". Keap calling for a boss untell they decline and take the name of the last person you spoke with.

2.Call law enforcement... they can mediate most problems.

not at checkpoint:
1.Got Feedback

2.Ton's of contact info

3.SF-95

4. Get a lawyer and file suit."

################################

Happy,

I had a gel-pack confiscated by a TSO supervisor in STL. It was keeping 13 oz of my wife's breast milk from spoiling. From a half-remembered view of some TSA website, I argued that it was OK for breastmilk, and the TSO supervisor said that gel-packs were only allowed for medical items, not infants. Since TSA doesn't publish or share their SSI secret rules or SOPs, there isn't anything for law enforcement to mediate, or anything a passenger can use to prove an item is permitted if a TSO says 'no'. Is a cop going to listen to some troublemaker say "but their website says...."? Should TSA allow passengers who bring in printouts of bits of the website, like "Bob says pie is permitted" to keep their items? That is as insane as your trusting potential terrorists to not photoshop their boarding passes.

After the milk spoiled and we poured it down the drain and my wife cried, I read the above cited page that said breastmilk is a "liquid medication", and I complained on 'got feedback'. But since TSA cannot replace 13 oz of my wife's breast milk, there isn't a dang thing you can do about my case. Lawsuit-wise, you TSAers weasel out with some "...or anything else the screener determines as a replica of something a paranoid might find dangerous" language that I can't find on your history-revising website right now. Do you seriously think I could successfully sue the TSA for a $2 gelpack or $1000 for some irreplaceable breastmilk? "Happy-to-Blow-Smoke" is more like it.

TSA has rigged the game in its favor and just pretends that there is some recourse based on some PR fluff posted on some history-revising non-authoritative website.

I know you can't replace my wife's breastmilk, so I'll forgive TSA when they prove to me that they can train their employees to follow their own rules. Before then, TSA is anti-mom, anti-baby, and anti-USA.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Currency Reporting

If you have any futhor questions about transporting your money just write to U.S. Customs Service or call this phone number

U.S. Customs Service
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229
Telephone (202) 927-1520

If you are worried about traveling with large sums of money through a TSA checkpoint then check this link out.

Traveling with Special Items

Does this work. I can say yes from personel experience.

December 17, 2008 6:41 PM

Perhaps I don't read well, but I cannot find anywhere in the referenced material any mention of TSA and reporting of people who have large sums of money to LEO.

I think we all know that leaving or entering the United States with over $10k requires certain customs forms to be submitted but once again this is not a TSA function.

The BSA makes no mention of the TSA and they have no part, reason or expectation to refer anyone to LEO for carrying cash.

Submitted by Robert Johnson on
Quote from HappyToHelp: "Hey thanks for waiting.

Currency Reporting

If you have any futhor questions about transporting your money just write to U.S. Customs Service or call this phone number

U.S. Customs Service
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229
Telephone (202) 927-1520"

All that's doing is regurgitating a law which everyone has already acknowledged exists.

Again, the question is where does it fall under TSA's authority to enforce it? It's a Customs issue and doesn't fall under TSA's scope (though it's pretty clear TSA is trying to expand that scope). Please show us where TSA has the legal authority to question if the proper forms have been filed.

I also don't see even if something wasn't declared yet right then for an international departure that it couldn't be declared up until the time of departure. Again, it's a Customs issue.

It's none of TSA's business if it's declared or not. Let your other DHS brethren and sisters enforce the law. TSA is not the be-all-end-all of what happens in an airport. It's become a self-important agency that thinks its more than the $8 an hour private security replaced. It's not.

Robert
Submitted by Anonymous on

Happy-to-Help posted in part.........

Anonymous said...
Well you bring up the BSA law. Please point to the section that says it is a crime that must be reported to a LEO if a person has $10k or more on their person and enter/pass through a TSA checkpoint.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

Hey thanks for waiting.

Currency Reporting

If you have any futhor questions about transporting your money just write to U.S. Customs Service or call this phone number

U.S. Customs Service
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229
Telephone (202) 927-1520

Happy, did you take the time to read the referenced material? In no way is TSA a part of that requirement. TSA is not Customs. Customs Agents or real agents, not like you TSO's.

Again any TSO who takes note of a person with a large sum of cash and takes any action is violating that persons rights.

I can't wait for a few of you TSO's to end up in the slammer for your illegal acts.

Submitted by Jim Huggins on

Mr. Gel-pack writes:

Lawsuit-wise, you TSAers weasel out with some "...or anything else the screener determines as a replica of something a paranoid might find dangerous" language that I can't find on your history-revising website right now.

I believe the exact quote is:

"Transportation security officers (TSOs) may determine that an item not on the prohibited items chart
is prohibited. In addition, the TSO may also determine that
an item on the permitted chart is dangerous and therefore
may not be brought through the security checkpoint."

Submitted by Anonymous on

HappyToHelp said...
Here is something new for the discussion on traveling with cash.

quoted from "AFSD-Law Enforcement
CAREER GUIDE"
2. Liaison to Local, State, and Federal Law Enforcement Agencies
m) Develops or establishes procedures to notify, as appropriate, Law Enforcement agencies, important information including when passenger cash limits are exceeded (i.e. $10k)

This should lead you guys in the right direction on who to talk to in regards to the cash issue.

hope this helps

source: AFSD-Law Enforcement
CAREER GUIDE

December 18, 2008 12:35 PM

...........................
I'n not sure what an AFSD is but I do know that TSO's are not LEO's.

So your reference holds no water.

Submitted by HappyToHelp on
Anonymous said...
I'm not sure what an AFSD is but I do know that TSO's are not LEO's.

AFSD info

I guess its a dream job LOL

My point was just ask the person at your local airport who developes the procedures. Why talk to middle men?

Anonymous said...
Happy, did you take the time to read the referenced material?

Yes.

Anonymous said...
Again any TSO who takes note of a person with a large sum of cash and takes any action is violating that persons rights.

Nope. I noticed you said "rights". How many are we talking about?
A TSO will not arrest you and they have not enforcement powers. :p

Anonymous said...
Again, the question is where does it fall under TSA's authority to enforce it?

TSA does not enforce it. TSA gives law enforcement referrels based on the airports security program. TSA has broad responsibility for transportation security across all transportation modes and to assess threats
to transportation under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) 49 USC §114. TSA is also
responsible for screening persons and property carried aboard passenger aircraft by an air carrier or foreign
air carrier under 49 USC §44901, and promulgated certain regulations at 49 CFR § 1540.105, 1540.107. Have fun TK.

Anonymous said...
And HQ will ignore them, just as they've done with all other questions posted here.

Why post if you feal that way? I'm curious. Bored or just tired of posting over at FT?


To... Mr. Gelpack

Get in contact with the TSA-Contact Center. Phone# 1-866-289-9673 E-mail: TSA-ContactCenter@dhs.gov

...and fill out a SF-95 for damages. Sorry I didn't post this info ealier back when you first reported this on the blog. I thought bob would address it but I was glad he apologized.

All right its friday. Now to start my vacation. Happy holidays guys. Will post more when I get back the 29th.

Happy holidays.
Submitted by HSVTSO Dean on
Anonymous wrote:
I'n not sure what an AFSD is but I do know that TSO's are not LEO's.

Assistant Federal Security Director for Law Enforcement, is what an AFSD-LE is. They're the TSA dude at the airport that does a lot of the interaction with the local LEOs, setting security policies with local law enforcement, stuff of that nature. Generally, they'd probably work with the local chief of police—or, at least, that's how it works here.

There's a number of AFSDs that do different jobs. Like, one AFSD will be in charge of screening operations, another will be the LEO liaison. I think the reference he was making was from the Career Guide (it's on the tsa.gov website, I'm just in a lazy mood and don't care to look up the coding to put it as a link, so the URL is at the end of this comment) for the AFSDs.

2.m under their Major Responsibilities header on page 5 does, indeed, state that it is the AFSD-LE's responsibility to develop/establish procedures for "the notification of law enforcement agencies, when appropriate, of important information."

And the example it gives is, indeed, "when passenger cash limits are exceeded (i.e. $10k)"

In this case, I think the general procedure is to call Customs to establish that they're not flying overseas, and, if they are, that they've filled out all applicable forms and such of declaration. Obviously, if the passenger is flying domestically, then nothing happens and you go on your happy, merry way.

AFSD-LE Career Guide URL: http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/afsd_lawenforcement_career_guide.pdf
Submitted by Mr Gel-pack on

Yeah Happy, the "Transportation security officers (TSOs) may determine that an item not on the prohibited items chart is prohibited. In addition, the TSO may also determine that an item on the permitted chart is dangerous and therefore may not be brought through the security checkpoint" quote hidden on the pdf is the carte blanche that destroys your recourse.

When TSOs use that rule to take baby food, gel-packs, battery packs, pies, and rubber band balls, it shows that the recourse methods you point are pure PR fluff. They look reasonable on the website, but are absoutely useless in practice. Kinda like the rest of TSA Security Theatre.

Submitted by Steve F on

Why isnt more money spent on getting baggage to its destination? What does it matter that you can screen a bag if it can't get to its destination?

Submitted by Anonymous on

Steve F said...
Why isnt more money spent on getting baggage to its destination? What does it matter that you can screen a bag if it can't get to its destination?

December 20, 2008 8:51 PM
......................
That would make it harder for TSO's to pilfer checked baggage.

Nothing to be gained by making sure baggage is secure!

Submitted by Anonymous on

Ha, if I were to truly believe that TSA actually moniters every checked bag searches, I am the Duke. They have and they will NEVER moniter thier own employees, they actually care less what happens to the passengers baggage and all pertaining thefts. It is only after the local law enforcement get way too many complaints will any action be taken. No action will be taken by TSA itself, as they say, they got security to worry about. Right along the line, they have a code of ethics to follow by, blah, let them see how it really is. I have flown numerous times since 9/11 and every time I get either rude comments, rude attitudes and many other disrespectful attitudes from their agents. How about this for chance, one of them decides to hit you , but you can not defend yourself in the attack or otherwise be labeled as an terrorist and so forth. Oh good luck in getting a complaint heard. Again, they careless as their agents are the best out there.

Read the stores of the thefts, attacks and so forth that stems from the TSA agents. Now dont get me wrong here, there is a need for the security, but there is NO oversight from the public side hence many violations occur at the hand of the TSA agents and the public is the victim with no recourse.

Submitted by Vincent on

What a ridiculous charade. Why can't the airlines provide security and then passengers can vote on what they want with their dollars. Why do we use a Soviet solution? This is a sham and a fraud. The government has never been good at anything, why would we trust our lives to it. They are making us less safe through this communist charade.

Submitted by Vincenzo on

I've brought several gels through these communist checkpoints in my carry on. Just more proof that it is all a fraud and a shame. These security measures are defeated daily by hundreds of thousands of people. If terra-ists wanted to bring things through they would use alternate means, or better yet go to a supermarket, football game, baseball game, movie theatre, etc, etc, etc. When will this communist, Orwellian government fraud start stationing gestapo at these venues? He you can't be too safe now can you? Your much more likely to be killed by lightning, a shark, gumball, or your DVD player than a terrorist. Just look how easily the sheople will accept the government into their rear areas without questioning even the most obvious of things.

Submitted by Anonymous on

When will passengers be paged to be present during physical baggage searches? That eliminates most of TSA's liability with regards to baggage theft. With CCTV and a phone system, passengers could just watch the search remotely, telling the inspector how to unlock and re-lock the baggage.

That's how the rest of the world does it: The baggage inspector pages the passenger. No TSA-recognized locks required. No unlocked baggage "suggested".

I'm all for this in-line system to increase efficiency and to reduce TSA payroll. However, only if passengers are paged and present (even via TV) if physical searches are required.

Submitted by Anonymous on

I'm confused about what to do about a recent situation that occurred after my checked luggage was inspected... My luggage was missing my medication but had someone else medication instead. This is kinda of a catch-22 as federal law prohibits one from having a different persons medications I'm inclined to throw the other persons out and not report it.

I did get the TSA notice that my luggage was inspected along with my medicine missing and replaced with another persons meds. What to do?

Submitted by Guest on

Is there a scenario where this in-line feature will delay the plane as baggage is rerouted for gate changes? I'm not sure I'm sold on this.

Submitted by Drew on

It seems to me that security is constantly getting more complicated for everyone since 9/11. For drivers we have different classes of licenses, which allow people with certain classes to drive larger and more dangerous vehicles. For air travel, we should allow people to obtain some so sort of qualified/easy boarding ID for people who have been proven to be less at risk. Just an idea as there has to be some way to advance security without hindering everyone’s travel.

Submitted by Dave The World ... on
When will Checked Baggage be safe from airport thieves?

An integrated GPS tracking system would be the best answer for this.
Submitted by Seth Chillian on

I think that the way the TSA is handling things is entirely ineffective. There needs to be a massive overhaul in the way things are done.

Submitted by Accura Network on

Nice Job...........
you just gave above that to "follow link" but there was no link and page was not found

Submitted by Steve Matson on

Fabulous!!!

Pages