Todos
← Back to Squawk list
TSA considering eliminating screening at smaller airports
Washington (CNN) The Transportation Security Administration is considering eliminating passenger screening at more than 150 small and medium-sized airports across the US, according to senior agency officials and internal documents obtained by CNN. The proposal, if implemented, would mark a major change for air travel in the US, following nearly two decades of TSA presence since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and comes as the Trump administration has stepped up screening measures… (www.cnn.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
I am no fan of TSA. I applaud any effort to reduce their numbers. That said, this is a typical idiotic idea. Terrorists will always take advantage of the weak link. Security MUST be uniformly applied at all airports and it should consist of well trained profilers.
Isn't this the same agency that basically says, "Without us you're all going to die from a terrorist hijacking!!!1! Terrorists are everywhere and can use almost anything to get a weapon on a plane. Therefore we need to look through your clothes and grab your junk...you know, for safety!"? When then would they ever (publicly admit they'd even) consider letting anyone fly anywhere without screening?
Last I checked a regional/feeder jet flying into a building has a pretty significant impact too. Sure, it's not going to do as much damage as a 7X7 or 3X0 but it's still going to leave a mark and instill fear (the real motivator). And lets not even start on the "coordinated attack" idea...3, 4, 5 flights from the same (or nearby) small/medium airport that did away with screening all being hijacked at the same time.
See, I don't work for the TSA and I can already come up with some plausible scenarios that make this seem like the worst idea ever.
Remember when Pittsburgh recently started allowing non-flying people onto the airside again? The flight attendants union published a scathing letter including this gem,
"Flight attendants are the last line of defense on an aircraft and as first responders, we know this move by TSA is a bad idea that needs to be reversed. Aviation security relies on a layered approach where if terrorists breach a layer, second and third layers come into play to protect us. Letting our guard down in Pittsburgh or any other airport for the benefit of retailers is not the right approach to airline safety and security."
That required everyone to go complete screening. I can only imagine the (somewhat justified) backlash from the flight attendants and pilots that will start if this idea goes through.
Last I checked a regional/feeder jet flying into a building has a pretty significant impact too. Sure, it's not going to do as much damage as a 7X7 or 3X0 but it's still going to leave a mark and instill fear (the real motivator). And lets not even start on the "coordinated attack" idea...3, 4, 5 flights from the same (or nearby) small/medium airport that did away with screening all being hijacked at the same time.
See, I don't work for the TSA and I can already come up with some plausible scenarios that make this seem like the worst idea ever.
Remember when Pittsburgh recently started allowing non-flying people onto the airside again? The flight attendants union published a scathing letter including this gem,
"Flight attendants are the last line of defense on an aircraft and as first responders, we know this move by TSA is a bad idea that needs to be reversed. Aviation security relies on a layered approach where if terrorists breach a layer, second and third layers come into play to protect us. Letting our guard down in Pittsburgh or any other airport for the benefit of retailers is not the right approach to airline safety and security."
That required everyone to go complete screening. I can only imagine the (somewhat justified) backlash from the flight attendants and pilots that will start if this idea goes through.
Asteroid insurance, I need to start selling asteroid insurance..... :-)
This is the most asinine thing I've heard of. Let's take DTW for example and all of the tiny feeder planes which go into terminals B&C. They'd literally have to redesign that entire concourse just for rescreening. Methinks if the federal government wants to save $115M- have our congressional 'leadership' start with blocking and tackling on spending bills.
Guess why the 9/11 went through Portland Maine to get to Boston. Portland was a weak link.
having worked at a major airport before 9/11 and after tsa was implemented, I can tell you this is a really dumb idea..the whole point of extra/stronger screenings of passengers was to prevent tragedy and promote safety..yes, it has needed some changes through the years,but this proposed plan would not save money, because different checkpoints would have to be created for those from smaller cities on commuter aircraft,and airports would have to remodel entrances and exits at the gates and checkpoints as well..checked baggage would have to be re screened through the x ray machines at the larger connecting airport also,causing twice the time and movement of baggage carts and personnel on the ramp...