Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Crime Government Transportation United States

TSA Union Calls For Armed Guards At Every Checkpoint 603

Posted by timothy
from the more-effective-than-at-the-post-office dept.
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Brian Tumulty writes at USA Today that the union representing airport screeners for the Transportation Security Administration says Friday's fatal shooting of an agent at Los Angeles International Airport highlights the need for armed security officers at every airport checkpoint. The screeners, who earn up to $30,000 annually, have not requested to carry guns themselves, but they do want an armed security officer present at every checkpoint says J. David Cox Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents the screeners. "Every local airport has its own security arrangement with local police to some type of contract security force," says Cox. "There is no standardization throughout the country. Every airport operates differently. Obviously at L.A. there were a fair number of local police officers there." Congress may investigate the issue but Sen. Tom Carper, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, says that "there will be an appropriate time — after all the facts have been gathered and thoughtfully analyzed —to review existing policy and procedure to see what, if anything, can be learned from this unfortunate incident to help prevent future tragedies." TSA officials say that they don't anticipate a change in the agency security posture at the moment, but "passengers may see an increased presence of local law enforcement officers throughout the country.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TSA Union Calls For Armed Guards At Every Checkpoint

Comments Filter:
  • by TheCarp (96830) <sjc AT carpanet DOT net> on Monday November 04, 2013 @08:19AM (#45324293) Homepage

    Kind of like how like how the Prison gaurds union oppose reform of drug laws. Because they are representing the gaurds and their jobs, and they would be hurt by any sane policy.

  • by JeffOwl (2858633) on Monday November 04, 2013 @08:33AM (#45324417)
    Wait until you arm them. Now 6 year old kids can watch their mothers get guns pointed in their faces while being groped.
  • Re:Oh sure! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Joce640k (829181) on Monday November 04, 2013 @08:38AM (#45324469) Homepage

    Hint: "Armed security officers" can also be untrained overpaid mouthbreathers with power trip issues.

    All it takes for them to get involved in a situation is a nod from one of the currently employed untrained overpaid mouthbreathers with power trip issues and one of the the newly employed untrained overpaid mouthbreathers with power trip issues will be right there to help.

  • Re:NOT posted as AC. (Score:5, Informative)

    by GameboyRMH (1153867) <gameboyrmh AT gmail DOT com> on Monday November 04, 2013 @09:09AM (#45324797) Journal

    Marathon runs obviously need an armed guard every 10 yards along the course. We have proof that terrorists see marathon runs as a target!

    You joke, but...

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/02/us-usa-newyork-marathon-idUSBRE9A104A20131102 [reuters.com]

  • by artfulshrapnel (1893096) on Monday November 04, 2013 @09:34AM (#45325105)

    They're referring to "Predictive Profiling", which is basically a system in which you start from the aggressor's general method of attack and work backwards to determine specific behaviors that might be indicative of their attempt to commit such an attack. Proponents actually disapprove of racial profiling as a methodology, because it introduces a weak spot in the security system. (i.e. recruit a white european woman if they're looking for dark-skinned arabic men with beards)

    One of the big things that makes it relevant here is the concept of end-to-end security: The idea that people should be interacting with security personnel repeatedly but casually throughout their time in the airport, not just at one high-intensity checkpoint. If they have to talk to a security guy at the parking lot, entrance, baggage check, security point, boarding area, and cinnabon then there's a good chance they'll eventually let something slip, get noticed, or crack under pressure. The important part of that is that the security guys should not be threatening everyone, just making pleasant conversation and keeping their eyes open.

    Under such a system, there would be no single checkpoint with lots of people bottled up as waiting targets. It might also have allowed earlier personnel (in the parking lot or by the entrance) to spot the threat before he reached his destination.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictive_profiling [wikipedia.org]

  • Re:NOT posted as AC. (Score:5, Informative)

    by capedgirardeau (531367) on Monday November 04, 2013 @09:52AM (#45325309)

    Does this mean Obama will stop his anti-second amendment agenda now?

    Stop spreading lies or being ignorant or both.

    Obama has done nothing related to gun control in his years in office except make it easier for people to own whatever type of firearm they want.

    He has signed legislation allowing guns in National Parks and on Amtrack trains.

    He signed legislation that makes concealed carry permits valid in one state valid in all states.

    He has never pushed an "assault" weapons ban or even restrictions on large capacity magazines.

    His justice department has never challenged any of the numerous state level laws that have increased gun rights (Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Wyoming, Texas, North Dakota, etc.) or any of the stand-your-ground laws.

    He is one of the most pro-gun Presidents in recent times and yet right wing delusionals (and firearm business interests) still trot out he is trying to take away guns.

  • Re:Oh sure! (Score:5, Informative)

    by ShanghaiBill (739463) on Monday November 04, 2013 @09:57AM (#45325373)

    The screeners, who earn up to $30,000 annually

    There are some places where that seems fine, but I'm thinking LA? That's a lousy salary....

    Yes, but it appears to be wrong. According to tsasalary.com [tsasalary.com], TSA inspectors earn an average of $45,000, and earn even more in high cost cities. Other links corroborate this amount, while none list a salary as low as $30k. Even the lowest starting salary is higher than that.

  • by Nexus7 (2919) on Monday November 04, 2013 @10:01AM (#45325415)

    There was never any doubt the gun nuts and anti-government types (= all of /.?) would be all over this one, but c'mon, at least use an analogy that fits. The TSA union wants armed guards to protect itself from nutsos with guns. Just like the TSA protects us from having to face people with weapons on planes. It is quite consistent.

    IMO, they should use local police. No need to bloat the payroll ad nauseum.

  • by swillden (191260) <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Monday November 04, 2013 @10:05AM (#45325441) Homepage Journal

    Most sane people do not feel safe with roaming machine-gun-toting civilians in any venue neither.

    OTOH, there hasn't been a single crime committed with a lawfully-owned civilian machine gun (or other automatic firearm) since 1934.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04, 2013 @10:12AM (#45325537)

    Aren't TSA civilians?

    "Civilian" isn't well-defined in most modes of its usage; it's a context-dependent term. Are police civilians? To soldiers they are, but police and non-police civilians often use the term to distinguish non-police from police. Many members of many government agencies do the same thing, do distinguish between those who have government-granted authority from those who don't. For that matter, people in some non-governmental groups use the term to distinguish members of their group.

    If you like, you can restrict the term to it's pure meaning of "not a soldier", but that just leaves a vacuum, a need for some term to fill its role in other contexts. Or you can just accept that it has different meanings in different contexts, and that it's nearly always quite clear what is meant.

  • Re:NOT posted as AC. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04, 2013 @11:18AM (#45326355)

    Does this mean Obama will stop his anti-second amendment agenda now?

    Stop spreading lies or being ignorant or both.

    1) Obama has done nothing related to gun control in his years in office except make it easier for people to own whatever type of firearm they want.

    2) He has signed legislation allowing guns in National Parks and on Amtrack trains.

    3)He signed legislation that makes concealed carry permits valid in one state valid in all states.

    4) He has never pushed an "assault" weapons ban or even restrictions on large capacity magazines.

    5) His justice department has never challenged any of the numerous state level laws that have increased gun rights (Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Wyoming, Texas, North Dakota, etc.) or any of the stand-your-ground laws.

    6) He is one of the most pro-gun Presidents in recent times and yet right wing delusionals (and firearm business interests) still trot out he is trying to take away guns.

    You stop spreading lies.

    Unlike you, I'll actually cite my facts

    1) Whatever type of firearm they want? Not likely: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/29/obama-issues-new-executive-orders-against-guns/

    2) This is technically true, but you are leaving out a key part: The law allows firearm owners to *check* their guns in luggage on Amtrak, not carry. Just as on a flight: http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-laws-obama-has-signed-2012-12

    3) I have found no news or information confirming this. Here's North Dakota's website on reciprocity: http://www.ag.nd.gov/BCI/CW/reciprocity.htm Doesn't look nation wide to me.

    4) Another lie. Obama has publicly stated his opposition to high capacity mags: http://www.policymic.com/articles/23489/obama-gun-control-plan-high-capacity-magazine-is-public-enemy-number-one

    5) His justice department has challenged Florida's stand-your-ground laws after the Trayvon Martin shooting. You can google the sources yourself... they're countless.

    So you stop spreading your lies.

  • by Quila (201335) on Monday November 04, 2013 @11:34AM (#45326543)

    The shooting at the NRA convention was an April Fools joke. I know you hoped it was true, but that kind of thing doesn't actually happen.

    There was a shooting at a gun show a while back, some idiot brought in a loaded shotgun to sell it, and it went off when he set it on a table. In the middle of a hall with many armed people, that was the only shot fired.

  • Re:NOT posted as AC. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04, 2013 @11:45AM (#45326707)

    "Obama has done nothing related to gun control in his years in office except make it easier for people to own whatever type of firearm they want."
    Negative. At least one executive order were issued by his administration restricting guns:
    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ap-exclusive-obama-offers-new-gun-control-steps

    "He signed legislation that makes concealed carry permits valid in one state valid in all states."

    There is no such Federal law making CCWs valid in one state valid in all. It is up to each law as to if they will honor another state's CCW. If there was such a law that you speak of, then we wouldn't need CCW Reciprocity Maps like this one:
    http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_carry_permit_reciprocity_maps.html

    "He has signed legislation allowing guns ... on Amtrack trains."
    Kind of. Amtrak does not allow you to carry, only check firearms in your checked luggage. In fact, you have to get a reservation 24 hours in advance just to check your bag with your firearm and/or ammo (unlike flying, where it's just a normal option when checking luggage):
    http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am%2FLayout&cid=1248542758975

    "He has signed legislation allowing guns in National Parks ..."
    Kind of. It's still up to the Superintendent of each NP as to allow you to carry. Yosemite allows no weapons whatsoever without a permit, and they won't issue permits. That means OC/pepperspray, knives, and clearly no firearms.
    http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/weapons.htm
    http://www.nps.gov/yose/parkmgmt/upload/compendium.pdf

    Please provide your sources to everything you've said. All my research and evidence was done with 15 minutes of Googling.

  • Re:Mod Parent Up (Score:5, Informative)

    by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Monday November 04, 2013 @11:46AM (#45326713)

    How long until it's not just some crazy guy off his meds and a normal person with a legitimate grievance...like a loved one being denied care under Obamacare?

    Not as long until some unformed idiot poses a question like that.

    You do know that "Obamacare" isn't an insurance plan or insurance company - right? You do know that the ACA only specifies *minimum* levels that all insurance plans must provide - right? You do know that all those plans are offered by private insurance companies - right? You do know that *private* insurance companies deny care all the fucking time, except now, under the ACA, they have fewer avenues to do so (no more: life-time limits or denials based on pre-existing conditions - before or after the fact) - right?

  • Re:Mod Parent Up (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04, 2013 @05:25PM (#45330855)

    The original Boston Tea Party was over the ability of the instigators to profit from smuggling tea. The Tea Act allowed for the East India Company to ship directly to the colonies and bypass the expenses of middlemen and dangerous sea voyages. That was going to dramatically drop the price of high quality legal tea and undercut the smuggled tea. If TSA regulations started hurting the profits of the wealthy, then it would be comparable.

What is mind? No matter. What is matter? Never mind. -- Thomas Hewitt Key, 1799-1875

Working...