Fire the Thugs at TSA and Hire the Military Vets to replace them!

reply to post by Violater1


So....instead of getting rid of the overly pervasive tsa, you want to replace tsa workers with highly trained military veterans....to act as security?.....While I can understand the need for professional workers. I don't think replacing an overly pervasive security with an overly pervasive security that has military training to kill/hurt people is necessary. Infact, I would argue that it is overkill. If you want to tighten security without victimizing the public, say by having retired military actually fly on the plane...like...an air marshal....then I think that would make sense and I could support that.

Having retired military work as security just seems a bit like having a cop making sure people don't cut lines at an amusement park. Sure would it be effective? Yes I suppose, but it wouldn't be necessary for that level of authority to accomplish the task.

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by KillDaTelavisionsus

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by KillDaTelavisionsus

 

Problem is, the Federal Gov treats our vets like crap when they get out of the service after doing 3+ tours.

Sorry but the real problem is , the American people let them.

Let them down???
Well that's a pink statement, and here's a red white and blue one for you. Hire the Vet, and you can bet that the job will get done, on time, the right way.

You`re missing the point , if some one rubbed you up in the street it is illegal , but just because someone is wearing a silly little suit and a hat millions if not billions of people have allowed themselves to be touched by strangers in the airport. Its like the movie : Idiocracy , these people are brain dead , give it a decade or so and they`ll be watering plants with power aid.

Why the need for this draconian security routine ? muslims wouldnt get thrown around and abused like Americans since the race card prevents anyone saying anything about anyone that is remotley black or atleast wearing a turban , so the measures are pretty pointless if they`re not stopping "the crazy muslams" which is what they where originally set up for.

Originally posted by GrimReaper86
reply to post by Violater1

 

Having retired military work as security just seems a bit like having a cop making sure people don't cut lines at an amusement park. Sure would it be effective? Yes I suppose, but it wouldn't be necessary for that level of authority to accomplish the task.

Have you ever been to a big amusement park that didn't have cops (Disney..., Six Flags, Ceder Point...)?
Having trained, experienced professionals makes too much sense?
Perhaps a following concern would be their carbon foot print, or amount of expelled methane gas

As a Vet myself I can tell you from my own experience, most of us will not evven consider the job.

We do not condone this type of idiocy, we would not follow the S.O.P. of intimidation and abuse, or harassment of those that "legally" opt out of the dangerous radiation scanners.

The TSA knows this, and so doesn't seek us out, as we would be a very big thorn in the side of their true intentions, which are to acclimate the public at large to draconian overly intrusive pointless and useless "security" measures.

Profiling is by far the most logical and useful form of screening, diddling kids and grannies is pure intimidation, PERIOD!

There are many of us Veterans here on ATS, I assume several more will stop by at some point to say basically the same things I have.

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
As a Vet myself I can tell you from my own experience, most of us will not evven(sic) consider the job.

Your speaking for all the Vets now? My brother was an O3 Airborne Ranger, Adjutant of NATO's Medical Battalion at S.H.A.P.E. When he got out, to feed his family, he worked night shift security guard in Sacramento. He would have taken a TSA job in a second. I would too if it was my only option.

We do not condone this type of idiocy, we would not follow the S.O.P. of intimidation and abuse, or harassment of those that "legally" opt out of the dangerous radiation scanners.
The TSA knows this, and so doesn't seek us out, as we would be a very big thorn in the side of their true intentions, which are to acclimate the public at large to draconian overly intrusive pointless and useless "security" measures.

Please provide the source of your TSA's SOP. Combining your above statement, didn't you ever go to your Lieutenant and complain? You can't tell me that your Lieutenant didn't go up the chain to find a resolution. Being a Lieutenant at one time, I had my butt chewed out a few times and I was grateful for the LPA. As an Officer, you get an OPR, and you do your best to correct the deficiencies. This is why we need Vets like you, in the TSA, to speak up, and change this from the inside out.This current administration will be voted out. And the TSA will be changed. Rebuilding the TSA with a military paradigm is an excellent solution.

Profiling is by far the most logical and useful form of screening, diddling kids and grannies is pure intimidation, PERIOD!

No argument here, I totally agree.

There are many of us Veterans here on ATS, I assume several more will stop by at some point to say basically the same things I have.

Time will tell.
Live from Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base.
Violator1 out.

reply to post by Violater1


What an AWESOME IDEA!

Then, when ever the TSA feels you're a "threat" they'll just shoot/taze/beat you to death!

Because it's working so well for our police force. Why wouldn't it work for TSA?

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Violater1

 

What an AWESOME IDEA! Then, when ever the TSA feels you're a "threat" they'll just shoot/taze/beat you to death! Because it's working so well for our police force. Why wouldn't it work for TSA?

And how is that different from what is happening now?
(l added my sarcastic remark to yours) .

reply to post by Violater1


You missed my point, it's not like they aren't capable of doing the work or qualified....it's that they're over qualified...it's like asking Steven Hawking to help you with your algebra....Can he do it? Well, obviously he can, but it would be an abuse of capability.

Originally posted by Expat888
Do away with the Terrorist State Agency entirely .... Dont insult vets ... set up for them to get jobs / training for jobs that are useful rather than being minions of the state to further oppress the people...

I have to echo this post.

The problem isn't in WHO the TSA hired, it's the TSA!

Privatise the TSA, get government out of it, lose DHS (redundant to the FBI anyways) and if the oppourtunity presents itself, sure, hire a vet!

Originally posted by beezzer

Privatise the TSA, get government out of it, lose DHS (redundant to the FBI anyways) and if the oppourtunity presents itself, sure, hire a vet!

What if Chaney ends up owning it

Even in private hands you cant guarentee who will end up controlling it and in the private sector they would not be held as accountable as the government would...

Originally posted by MDDoxs

Originally posted by beezzer

Privatise the TSA, get government out of it, lose DHS (redundant to the FBI anyways) and if the oppourtunity presents itself, sure, hire a vet!

What if Chaney ends up owning it

Even in private hands you cant guarentee who will end up controlling it and in the private sector they would not be held as accountable as the government would...

Then the airport can fire "Cheneys" TSA.

Right now, since it's "government" the airports can't axe them.

reply to post by beezzer


True, but firing people like you have mentioned incurs a great cost and in our current economic climate it could bankrupt airlines and cost many many their jobs.

Edit: I admit to a very broad assumption, but will keep my retort intact

reply to post by thehoneycomb


No, it is not. Do your homework.

In 1973 the 9th Circuit Court rules on U.S. vs Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908, there are key pieces of wording that give the TSA its power to search essentially any way they choose to. The key wording in this ruling includes “noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.”

U.S. vs Davis goes onto to state “[an administrative search is allowed if] no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.”

link

Just to add,

I kind of shot from the hip there and to be honest I just realized that what i said may have not made sense.

Been a long day.

Most airports are state owned property. Bringing military to secure state owned property is against the law.

reply to post by Violater1


So did you go inform a supervisor about it?

The TSA has a veterans outreach program and also offeres a veterans preference incentive to qualified veterans. This gives veterans an edge over the average guy applying for the job. They also already employ many veterans.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Most airports are state owned property. Bringing military to secure state owned property is against the law.

They're not talking about active military, they are talking about retiree's and former military, i.e. civilians.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by Violater1

 

So did you go inform a supervisor about it?

I'm not sure to what your referring to?

My beef with TSA:

3) my battery operated tooth brush and my tooth paste are NOT components of a bomb.
2) getting mostly naked in public isn't my idea of a good time.

My number one beef--

Was in airport a year or so ago. I watched as TWO (count them, one -two) agents lifted a 120lb elderly woman from her wheel chair to first slide the airports own chair thru, then watched as the moron twins struggled against each other and the little grandma thru the mechanism designed to make me feel safer. Obviously the employees had no clue what they were doing. The woman was visibly upset, and holding on to the only thing she could...two individuals that obviously had no training in the task they were executing.

9/11 motivated this change, isn't that correct? Box cutters? buildings doing surprising things in regards to damage? conspiracy infused from day one to veil, detract & generally cause enough of a pause in the way the public functions daily?


I want to take a brief moment here and just say that while box cutters are a no-go for flight...? Knitting needles are approved since 2002. A knitting needle made of bamboo would very easily cause damage, in the right hands (but I'd love some new slippers this Christmas)

It makes no sense to me and I will probably get held up in a small room with an under paid, over-worked shiny suited 20-something popping a vein in his head and sticking my name forever on the "whack job, potentially dangerous" list.