I don't mind the added extra security at airports but the lack of consistency with their policies and methods leaves me wondering what Tom Ridge does during the day.
For instance, at Long Beach Airport your not allowed to touch anything close to the bag scanners, poker chips are easily confused with perfect cylinder plastic explosives requiring inspection, and an accidental pocket knife is allowed through without so much as a warning.
In contrast at the Oakland Ghetoport it's your responsibility to push your own items into the scanner and all of your bags have to pass inspection before you are allowed to pass. Poker chips are fine but a rolled up paper poster is very suspicious and must be x-rayed. And how the ghetoport rope line 'barrier' is supposed to make anything more secure remains a mystery.
I've been through a lot of airports since 9/11 and I've seen the transformation of airport security — from the heavily armed National Guard to the complacent and current version of the TSA. Up until this last trip I really believed that flying in the United States had become a bit more secure. But after having just gone through two very different security checkpoints managed by the same Department of Homeland Security I'm not so sure we're any better off than we were in August of 2001.
Why our National Guard is in Iraq and not protecting our airports is beyond me — these overpaid federal security cops aren't cutting it anymore.
Join the fray by reading through and commenting at the end.
Just last week, I passed through security twice, in different cities, wielding (unbeknownst to me) a pocket knife in my carry on bag. Granted, the knife also contained a screw driver and tweezers... If I had more time, I could have dismantled the bird mid-flight I bet.
I flew out of Newark recently and there was a really wonderful-in-a-bad-way photocopied sign posted. It offered guidance, on some official letterhead, on how you the traveller stuck in line with enough time to read this small 8.5 x 11 sign could speed things along. It made repeated reference to the usage of "divestment bins" - in other words, those gray tubs you put your stuff into. That was a phrase I hadn't heard before (and doesn't show up in Google, or anywhere on the TSA site) and just summed up for me how out of touch government can be.
I did really want to take a picture of the sign for blogging purposes, but given the ambiguity of what is allowable in the US these days (hey, you can't film a building or take pictures of a bridge) I didn't want to be taken out of line and beaten for possibly trying to capture confidential information about TSA security procedures. So, I didn't take the picture. But I can still tell this story!
Last summer I took a trip to Europe and as I usually do when traveling, I took my pocket knife with me. This isn't no multi-use pocket knife, but a a small Buck-type folding blade.
I got right to the checkpoint scanner and before I remembered the thing was in my pack. I had this dumb look on my face like "Oh Shit" for a second or two, they asked if there was anything in my bag and I quickly said "No sir". Long story short, I carried on a 3-4 inch, sharp as hell blade in my luggage no problem. This was SFO.
Stupid Paris airport made me check everything, so it wasn't an issue on the way back. They even made me check my skateboard, after I had gone through check-in and the desk clerk said it would be fine to carry on a skateboard (as I did on the way over). I don't like the Paris airport.
Airport security is pretty much a joke, some people get grilled and others just stroll on through carrying whatever the like in their bags.
Last time I flew they confiscated my fingernail clippers, and disregarded my pocket knife in my bag, and, of course, all my razors for shaving... the the clippers can be dangerous, I understand.
3.5 years and still they don't guard the grounds of the airports securely, check the cargo, thoroughly check the employees... I'm more scared of the under-paid, narrow minded, part time employees just as much.
Laughable, another brainwashed patriot afraid to think.
You kneed to wake up.
Or just a troll.
You're 100% correct about the inconsistencies in airport security, but what got me was your comment about Oakland's "Ghetoport." I hope you meant that the airport is located in a crappy part of town rather than some slight on the demographics of the city of Oakland?
Acknowledging the fact that I've only made one round-trip flight to Japan since 9/11, I haven't had any problems at the airports on either end (well the immigration line at Narita sucked, but hey). My mother-in-law, on the other hand, was stopped and searched both ways on a flight from Tulsa to Baltimore. I guess they have to pick out old white women on occasion so as to not appear racial.
I fly out to Tokyo again soon; here's to hoping I don't run into any problems.
I was curious about 'ghetoport' [sic] myself (guessing he means ghetto). I'm not sure there's another meaning to ghetto other than demographic.
Steve,
It's a shame that the government has got it into your head that it might be unsafe to take a picture of a random object in the airport.
I accidentally carried a Leatherman knife on a flight to San Diego from LaGuardia. My father's toiletry bag and nail clippers were of note to the TSA, but not my 5 inch blades of varying serration and sharpness.
I have to agree with the airport security inconsistency. I experienced it travelling to the Middle East in 2002. Leaving from the small airport at Myrtle Beach to link up to our international flight in Newark, our bags were opened and inspected by friendly but thorough security. Traveling back to the US we encountered no security, with only minimal security going through passport control, and no bag searches of our carry-on luggage. I guess we were more of a threat leaving the USA than coming in from the Middle East-- even with Syrian stamps in our passports.
One thing I will say: people are more patient now in security lines. My return flight to Chicago came the day it was announced that US undercover investigators were able to sneak explosives and weapons past security checkpoints. The lines at O'Hare was long as security was tight, but there was little grumbling as people seemed willing to accept it as the price of a little more safety.
I've deleted Pid's comment because it was stupid — I should ban you sucka.
Anyway, "ghettoport" is not in relation to the location of the Oakland "International" Airport. The label is in reference to the weak security, layout, design, and lack luster amenities of the facilities. I've seen regional airports with more class.
It is true that in regards to SFO, Oakland's the cheaper airline -- they've been doing construction for about five years now to get that thing improved.
...and, from the times I've been there, it's so far from Oakland it might as well be Alameda.
Either way, I feel the safety is more cosmetic than it is realistic. The system does not work as efficient as it needs too.
Airport security in the US is a joke, and will be for the forseeable future. If you want to see it done right, go to Israel or fly El Al -- it's inconvenient and time-consuming, but it is fairly secure. That's the level of security that tells people you are serious about it. Anyone who ever has flown into or out of Israel, or on El Al, can tell you that no American traveller (or airline) would tolerate that kind of process (not for long, anyway) because it's a pain in the ass (and it's expensive) -- but it is secure. Here, everyone talks the talk, but no one wants to walk the walk.
A better idea than screening OUT all of the knives and stuff that we carry would be to make it mandatory that everyone is wielding some kind of small weapon, whether it be a small (4-5") knife, baton, or similar item. If you assume that terrorists are going to be among the minority (at most 8 out of 50-150 passengers) on the plane, you can figure that they'll be able to maim or kill only a small number of passengers or crew before they're incapacitated by the rest of the passengers.
Instead of the pat-downs, wouldn't it be much better to hear, "Excuse me sir, you don't appear to have your weapon handy. Please select a knife from the cabinet and attach it to your belt." There would have to be an exemption for persons who can demonstrate sufficient mastery of kung-fu.
Having flown a lot to the Bay area in the last few years I'll defend Oakland over SFO any day. Close to BART, not fogged in, delays are rare, etc. Brian, I'd wager the TSA is actually thinking this way, hence the barricaded cockpit doors and the lack of ever seeing the pilot walk down the aisles. I think it would be very hard to get into a cockpit these days. Blowing up the whole plane is probably easier, but you're going to need more than a leatherman to do that. G, btw, Webster's first definition of ghetto is "a section of a city occupied by a minority group who live there especially because of social, economic, or legal pressure," so just to be sensitive you might want to watch the use of that term when you simply mean lacking class. You're ruining your future chances of electability. :)
Who uses Webster's anymore? Straight from the Online Slang Dictionary:
ghetto - adj - 1. of poor quality or poor looking. ("That shirt is so ghetto.")
Sorry, guess I know how blanco you actually are and didn't take your reference as a Yo! Airbag raps moment. It's like Dre can say the N-word but Eminem can't—know what I'm saying?
A month ago while in Puerto Rico I needed a small bag to put items that did not fit in my regular bag. My friend gave me a small bag to stuff my crap in. At the airport I went through security. I was asked what country I am from and all the usual "tight security" stuff.
The next day after I arrived home my friend called me freaking out because he left his pot and pipe in the bag gave me. I checked the little bag and sure enough the stash was there. I don't do drugs so it would have been nuts to be in jail for it but... Security never even cought on to that. THANK GOD!!!!
I should point out that the people of Oakland deserve a far, far better airport than what previous politicians have built for them. Like their fine city, the airport should be a gleaming example of the properity and cosmopolitian culture that is a part of each and every citizen of Oakland.
Flying from London Heathrow to LAX, and then back, I was struck by the different security measures. Heathrow seemed much more efficient and sensible than outbound LAX, and the security measures definitely seemed more integrated,
Whilst I appreciate that some American security measures were only put in place post-9/11, having a baggage scanner in the middle of the check-in area seemed non-sensical, and again, loving the use of the fabric barriers.
Then, a massive queue whilst we removed our shoes, took laptops out of their cases, and went through the final checks.
However, I guess the absence of airplane-based terrorist attacks must say something for the success of these measures....I just wish they'd be more efficient.
Sidenote - my mother, a petite woman, was stopped both outbound an inbound. I guess she just looks like the terrorist type, huh?
The only people that should be forced to go through security are people that look like they are from middle eastern descent or redneck whites that are profusely sweating carrying either a non concealed gun or knife. Let the blacks and Hispanics pass without any inspection. Asians and whites should pass through pre 9/11 style security. Camel jockeys should get the full body cavity search, not be allowed to check or carry on ANY items (they can send all luggage via USPS parcel post) and be forced to wear jailhouse orange jump suits while on the plane.
Because we all know that Cat Stevens is a terrorist threat to the nation... I mean, come on! I'm being followed by a moonshadow? That has to be some sort of code phrase for "Attack now!" ;)
This has nothing on the security checks in an Indian airport.
Unless you have a ticket, gun-toting constables will deny entry, even if all you want is to visit the money exchange counter. After your entry, your heavy luggage is scanned and roped with a plastic tape. Then you continue towards the check-in counter, where the plastic tape is checked for tampering, duly tagged and sent off. This is the time for a little prayer; hopefully you will see them again.
With your carry-on luggage (no trollies allowed), you join the queue for immigration. As you reach your gate, you are identified (with passport / boarding pass) for the fourth time (previously during initial entry, luggage scan, check-in counter). First an entry through a metal detector door, then thoroughly with a hand gadget (its quite an inspection for a first date). Simulataneously, your hand luggage is being scanned and duly tagged. God forbid that you have a battery or adapter of any sort (a laptop battery could be a bomb). If you have cameras, the lens may be opened and checked. After the all clear, you can finally relax in the lounge. Too bad that the AC is not working.
If you are an unlucky bastard, you may have to board a bus to the plane (and identify your baggage before it's stowed in the cargo bay!), your carry-on bags will be checked again before you board the plane.
Now folks, thats airtight security!
I am a bit troubled by the insinuation that somehow the security guys should judge whether passengers are the terrorist types by only physical characteristics.
That is as stupid and reprehensible as just singling out passenger of middle-eastern descent or asians. There is no terrorist type. Most of the time these people may not even know that they are conduits for something destructive.
Therefore, the security folks should not judge and should just do their jobs, even if they are petite women or celebrities such as Cat Stevens (who by the way has donated money to Hamas).
It's predictable. We get rightfully focused on security after 9/11, then we start slowly feeling a bit safer again and we start to worry less and less. So basically, give it a year or three and we'll be right be to 9/10/03 at a screening station near you.
We replaced the privately contracted lameass rent-a-cops with... well... governmentally contracted lameass rent-a-cops? Yep, nice work.
Sunny, you should head over to the local TSA recruiting fair, with that kind of naivete, you're just their type. Single out anyone who looks like the 19 pathogens who boarded those 4 planes, I'm perfectly comfy with it. Since I bear more than a passing resemblance to your average Lebanese mook, I'm more than happy to get in line to be sweat by The Man.
Then again who cares about common sense, feelings are the only thing that matters.
Cornelius,
Its not naive, its common sense to check everyone. Believe it not the Middle east doesn't have a monopoly on terrorists. Therefore, just selectively targetting them will be ineffective.
But does that ever happen? Yes and no. I have been singled out before (even though I am not a muslim or from the Middle east). What I am suggesting is that if they targetted people only by physical attributes, it does little to guarantee security. The only way security can be guaranteed is by checking everyone thoroughly. That's price we pay.
So when I'm going through security in Las Vegas and my buddy - who's 5'3", 35 and has Down's Syndrome - is taken aside into the plexiglass "room," scanned by hand, forced to partially undress, after which his suspenders are confiscated, I'm supposed to believe that it's all for our safety?
Whatever, mate. Tell it to the the lady knitting with the 18" needles sitting RIGHT NEXT TO US.
Yeah, thats the inconsistency that I am referring to. If you just target some based on how they look, its no security.
What has height and age have to do with being a terrorist? Someody might put something illegal on your belongings and you won't have a clue. That sort of a thing happens all the time.