These aren't the box cutters you're looking for. Move along.

[quade 3]

WTF?!?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TRAVEL/01/15/airport.security.ap/index.html

So, you go through the metal detector -- twice -- and if they don't -think- you are suspicious they simply let you through?

Oh, that's just freekin' perfect.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[AndyMan 7]

That makes a lot of sense to me.

You're in line. You forget to take off your big honkin belt buckle. You walk through, it goes off. You take off the belt buckle, it doesn't go off. You go on on your way. That makes sense to me.

Here's the current scenario: You're standing in line, you forget to take off your big honkin belt buckle, you set it off, you get detained and closely inspected for 3-5 minutes. It's not a major hassle, but it's still a hassle.

I much prefer taking off the belt buckle, then trying again.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[lemonjelly 0]

That explains it!

Man found with live rounds in his pocket at heathrow airport

*************************************************
RED LIGHTS & OFF LANDINGS ARE JUST MY THANG
http://www.redlightrob.co.uk

[bvsdjumper 0]

I agree with AndyMan.

What's the difference between:

A) You go through the detector and set it off. You remove the things you forgot and should have removed in the first place. Go through again and it doesn't go off. You're on your way.

and

B) You removed everything you should have. Go through and it doesn't go off. You're on your way.

If you're trusting the metal detector, you're trusting the metal detector.

I like this new rule because scenerio A would have helped me a few times when I forgot about my stupid watch, another time when I forgot about the stupid metal things on my boots, and another time when I forgot about the stupid other set of keys in my other pocket... I almost always get the second shoes off, personal wand, and pat-down search that could have been avoided with a second try.

What upsets you about this?

Art

Sky-div'ing (ski'div'ing) n. A modern sport that involves parties, bragging, sexual excesses, the imbibing of large quantities of beer, and, on rare occasions, parachuting from aircraft.

[goose491 0]

Why not? I've only ever had to be screened once in my number of flights and I set the detector off many a time. I had to take off my boots this one time and boy was I pissed (army boots).

"Take off you boots and your belt sir."

"It's not the boots, it's the steel rod in my leg."

"Take off your boots and your belt sir."

"I'm telling you it's not my boots, they're made of leather, could you please just use the wand to see? I'll show you my scar and everything."

"Take off your boots and your belt sir."

Oh well, one born every minute. Anyway, I digress. Other than this instance (and before the rod in the leg), It was always 1 pass. If I set it off I'd take off my belt and anything else that may have been the culprit and I'd go through again.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[JeffD 0]

Well I'm sorry but no matter how much they scan people, there are still plenty of ways to get something like a box cutter onto an airplane. I am not going into detail, but if someone were desperate enough then it can easily be done. I think all this security is just going to deter the few "stupid" ones that cant figure out how to get around the security.

[cptnstratn 0]

Actually the current problem is going through, getting buzzed for forgetting your cell phone is hooked to your belt, or your chronograph (I mean watch) is still on, and immediately having to go through a wand search. The new procedure will allow you to step back through, remove whatever you forgot and take another try. If you still buzz the thing, they'll still search you. (As I read it.)

I kinda like it, after seeing too many people forget to take everything off and send it through the xray machine, I think this will speed the lines along a little bit.

Steve

[quade 3]

Quote

A) You go through the detector and set it off. You remove the things you forgot and should have removed in the first place. Go through again and it doesn't go off. You're on your way.

Except that's not the way it works, at least not according to my understanding of it via the article.

Here's my understanding.

Go through metal detector -- alarm.
Remove what you think set it off.
Go through metal detector again -- alarm.

If TSA Agent -thinks- you might still be suspicious, you receive more in depth personalized search.

If TSA Agent -thinks- you're just a bumpkin that doesn't know how to travel, he waves you through.

So, knowing human nature and how things work . . . productivity and all . . . complaints, lines, et al.

What do you think is going to be the upshot of all this?

I think the TSA agents will generally pass people even if the metal detector says they have stuff on them. Oh, sure, they'll pull people out just enough to keep their TSA wanding agent busy, but no more than that.

To me, this is far more dangerous than the system we had in place a few years ago.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[newsstand 0]

For economic reasons this whole thing as to get simpler. Where are all of the restaurants and shops in airports, behind security. Without friends and family in there eating too it hurts business. The longer things are quiet the sooner we will get back to the old days when everyone got to go to the gate. Hell remember the real old days before security and you could get on the plane to say good-bye.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[quade 3]

As for people forgetting to take everything off.

I still maintain we need some sort of IQ test before allowing people to travel.

Seriously, if you are traveling and think it's ok to leave your cell phone and keys in your pocket when walking through the metal detector, I gotta wonder.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[bvsdjumper 0]

My initial reading of the article didn't make me think you could get waved through even after setting off the alarm twice. I read it again and found this sentence which confuses me a bit:

Quote

Now, those who make it through the metal detectors a second time -- and who haven't been flagged for extra screening -- can go right on to their gate.

Make it through the second time how?

More to come on this but I have a meeting now. Gotta go to work damn it.

Art

Sky-div'ing (ski'div'ing) n. A modern sport that involves parties, bragging, sexual excesses, the imbibing of large quantities of beer, and, on rare occasions, parachuting from aircraft.

[SkydiveMonkey 0]

There's been twice I've taken off everything metal, exept my watch. Twice I got searched, even though the security dude knew it was only my watch causing it. Makes perfect sense to me.

____________________
Say no to subliminal messages

[diverdriver 5]

Quote

WTF?!?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TRAVEL/01/15/airport.security.ap/index.html

So, you go through the metal detector -- twice -- and if they don't -think- you are suspicious they simply let you through?

Oh, that's just freekin' perfect.

Dude, quit spazzing. I know I've forgotten a little change in my pockets and said off the detector. Let me go back trough quick...remove it in plain sight and try again. Doesn't go off, no big deal. Sheeesh. They've got them so turned up on the detectors that the metal spiral holding my mini-logbook together set it off at some stations.

[Frau Farbisina] SEND IN THE PROBE!

Sheeesh...just let me remove the damn thing and try again without the extra probing thank you.

[OB1] This isn't the perfect world you're looking for Quade....move along. LOL...

[diverdriver 5]

Quote

***
If TSA Agent -thinks- you might still be suspicious, you receive more in depth personalized search.

If TSA Agent -thinks- you're just a bumpkin that doesn't know how to travel, he waves you through.

So, knowing human nature and how things work . . . productivity and all . . . complaints, lines, et al.

What do you think is going to be the upshot of all this?

Dude.....remember the phrase "parachute failed to open". Just might be this article didn't tell it like it REALLY is. Right Quade?

[wlie 0]

Quote

From the article:
Typically, passengers unfamiliar with the new machines would think a penny or a sneaker wouldn't set off the alarm, only to find out that they were wrong.

As in a Sneakers candy?

My other ride is the relative wind.

[kallend 1,679]

Quote

They've got them so turned up on the detectors that the metal spiral holding my mini-logbook together set it off at some stations.

I can beat that. The aluminized foil wrapper around a granola bar set it off for me at O'Hare.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[bvsdjumper 0]

Quote

Now, those who make it through the metal detectors a second time -- and who haven't been flagged for extra screening -- can go right on to their gate.

By make it through a second time, I think they mean going through the second time without it going off.

The impression I'm left with is:

If you make it through the first time without setting it off, then they will let you go or second screen you anyway.

If you set it off the first time but not the second, again, they will let you go or second screen you anyway.

If you set it off twice, you get the second screening.

I didn't get the impression that if you set it off twice that they would let you go on if they felt like it. If that is the case, however, then I agree that that would be a bad thing.

--Art

Sky-div'ing (ski'div'ing) n. A modern sport that involves parties, bragging, sexual excesses, the imbibing of large quantities of beer, and, on rare occasions, parachuting from aircraft.

[quade 3]

Spazzing? Geeze, nice come back there Chris.

Quote

[OB1] This isn't the perfect world you're looking for Quade....move along. LOL..

I'm not looking for a perfect one. Just one that makes sense.

If we're going to take aviation security seriously (create new federal bureaucracies and spend oodles of taxes on it), let's take it seriously.

If not, let's go back to the old way of doing things and have the airlines pay for their own security.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[diverdriver 5]

Quote

If not, let's go back to the old way of doing things and have the airlines pay for their own security.

Quade....we ARE paying for the security. We've had to lower the price of our tickets to keep people flying because the increased taxes have detered people from going some place. And in turn we've cut wages all around. Except for the higher ups. Anyway.....

This is how it should have been all along man. Not this "beeeeep" and then get your shit jumped ghestapo crap. Let me walk back through and find the offending item. No subsequent beep and off you go. Beep again and you get the "wand". I don't see where you get a free pass if you don't look threatening. Just isn't gonna happen that way.

And you didn't comment on my "parachute failed to open" comment. This article just might have gotten some of it wrong. Not that I'm bagging on the press because I know how much you love them.

[sdgregory 0]

Um where does it say that they can set it off the second time andget waved throug? You must be reading too much into this. My understanding is that if you go through the second time and it does NOT go off then okay move along nothing to see here. If you do set it off, well extra screening for you.

In all the times I have flown I always got a second chance through the gate. I was always forgetting a belt buckle or a key ring.

The only time I had a real problem was coming home from the Marines for leave and I was wearing my Dress Blues. I walked through the detector and well duh! my uniform set that thing off like 16 year old boy in a free whorehouse.

They told me I had to take off my belt and medals right there and I said, "Are you nuts? You give me the respect due a Marine and take me somewhere private. I will not strip my uniform in public."

Only time I ever had a rpoblem where they did not pass me through the detector twice.

[diverdriver 5]

Quote

They told me I had to take off my belt and medals right there and I said, "Are you nuts? You give me the respect due a Marine and take me somewhere private. I will not strip my uniform in public."

I'm glad they gave you the respect you deserve. Unfortunately they never gave that respect to the flight crews. Said it was "good" for the public to see us submitting to the BS strip searches. Yah, we're still bitter about it.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[quade 3]

Quote

Quade....we ARE paying for the security.

And so is every tax payer in the U.S., which is quite different than they way it used to be. It used to be that only people that flew, were hit with the cost of security in the form of higher tickets, now, while the airlines still pay, so does -everybody else- in form of a higher deficit (eventually taxes) to pay for the TSA.

Quote

And you didn't comment on my "parachute failed to open" comment. This article just might have gotten some of it wrong. Not that I'm bagging on the press because I know how much you love them.

Don't get me wrong, there's -plenty- I hate about the press. Mostly the lazy ones that simply regurgitate what the governement or business tells them. I've been on both sides of the manipulation, but mostly the business side telling the media what it should think. It's amazing how incredibly lazy and stupid some of them can be. So, if you want to suggest that maybe this reporter didn't get his facts straight, I almost have to accept that as a possibility.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[diverdriver 5]

You and I are on the same side man. (peace emoticon) We both want a safe, secure transportation system. As someone who lives this system every day I can tell you that this change really is for the better and does not decrease safety. I think that fact that 1,000s of airport workers passing onto property without ever being screened while pilots have to be searched is a much greater hazard to flying safety than this little change. But that's my two cents as you've seen.

[cvfd1399 0]

All it takes is $ to pay off tarmac worker.

[sdgregory 0]

Actually, I stopped there on the story because it seemed irrelevant, but they did not do that right away. I had to make a big stink to get them to do it. Basically, I refused to strip my belt and Blues Coat off and they finally had no choice but to lead me to a private room.

Then they never made me take anything off. I was pissed. They just patted me down and sent me on my way. Why couldn't they have done that to begin with? FYI - This was back in 91 before the New way of doing things.