More TSA nonsense

vontresc said:
Apparently at our airport (KMSN) the TSA get bored, and tries to "breach" the AOA through the FBO on a regular basis. I wouldn't put it past them to ramp check folks and play gotcha games around here.
Click to expand...

Sounds like someone with an open carry should shoot one of them. When the guilty TSA individual tried to claim he was doing his job, point to the relevant document as grounds for the shooting.
 
Ghery said:
No such places in the town in eastern Washington where I grew up. We're talking late 1960s here. Certainly didn't have web sites to go to. :D Besides, the guy was active in the art department. The raw materials were readily available. :D
Click to expand...

You had the ads in comic books you could clip out and mail order from.

You didn't have comic books? :smilewinkgrin:
 
vontresc said:
At least the Airport Ops people are on our side. TSA says access should be on an as needed basis, so when the #2 TSA guy asked for GA access the airport ops manager told him to justify his need, and denied him access :). Apparently the TSA guy didn't like that, but in the end couldn't justify need.
Click to expand...

Hahaha!!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I love our airport, even if having airlines means we have to deal with weenies now and then. :yes:
 
steingar said:
If everybody ignores this and refuses to pay stupid TSA fines, what can they legally do about it?
Click to expand...
Seize any property you have to pay it. That's done by the US Marshals Service to handle any debts owed the government, including civil penalties for FAA violations, taxes owed the IRS, etc.
 
Ron Levy said:
Seize any property you have to pay it. That's done by the US Marshals Service to handle any debts owed the government, including civil penalties for FAA violations, taxes owed the IRS, etc.
Click to expand...
I'm sure I could counter-sue before it came to that, and make this a multi-year process with lots of opportunity for the government to embarrass itself. Maybe that is what we need.

Of course, I'd dispute any penalties first, which, with appeals, would take...I don't know, a year or two maybe? I guess they might get their money in 5-8 years; or never.
 
Last edited:
On this "challenging" business, I think maybe somebody misunderstood what was said. For a variety of reasons, they cannot require a private citizen to enforce the law. About all they can require you to do would be to notify the appropriate security agency about folks in the area without a badge, and to not act to allow an unauthorized person entry (e.g., not to open the gate if an unauthorized person wants you to open the gate for them, and even then, you could be excused if you acted under duress, like a gun to your head).
 
"Oh, I'm sorry, I let them in without a badge because they claimed they were a TSA inspector and were acting under the authority of a new secret TSA directive. Since there clearly are secret directives, how am I supposed to know what I'm supposed to do?" :D

Seriously. Seems like a perfect excuse for me, and yet another reason the TSA is stupid.
 
sba55 said:
I'm sure I could counter-sue before it came to that, and make this a multi-year process with lots of opportunity for the government to embarrass itself. Maybe that is what we need.

Of course, I'd dispute any penalties first, which, with appeals, would take...I don't know, a year or two maybe? I guess they might get their money in 5-8 years; or never.
Click to expand...
I think your ideas on this are legally unrealistic, but you may consider yourself free to try it.
 
sba55 said:
"Oh, I'm sorry, I let them in without a badge because they claimed they were a TSA inspector..."
Click to expand...
As you well know, any Federal agent (other than one working undercover) must identify him/herself with badge/credentials when making a demand like this. No creds, no authority.
 
Ron Levy said:
I think your ideas on this are legally unrealistic, but you may consider yourself free to try it.
Click to expand...
How so? I'd be more than happy to pay for this, and I'm also fairly sure that organizations with much greater resources (ACLU maybe) would help out.
 
Ron Levy said:
As you well know, any Federal agent (other than one working undercover) must identify him/herself with badge/credentials when making a demand like this. No creds, no authority.
Click to expand...
Ok, but maybe I don't know this. I have no idea what the secret directive stipulates.
 
I think some folks are just throwing things around for the sole purpose of trying to stir up an argument even though they have no basis in law. Therefore, I'm out of the pool.
 
sba55 said:
"Oh, I'm sorry, I let them in without a badge because they claimed they were a TSA inspector and were acting under the authority of a new secret TSA directive. Since there clearly are secret directives, how am I supposed to know what I'm supposed to do?" :D

Seriously. Seems like a perfect excuse for me, and yet another reason the TSA is stupid.
Click to expand...

You don't REALLY think you'll get the TSA on a logic puzzle, do you, Captain Kirk? *

They just answer that that wasn't a real TSA agent and you should have let the real TSA agent that didn't have a uniform, say anything or provide any ID in without any lip.

Need I remind that these are the guys who take butter knives away from the guy flying the jet?


* They'll just say they always win at Tic-tac-toe but the information is a matter of national security.
 
Last edited:
Hey, I was genuinely curious. But can Federal Marshals seize public lands, and can they close an airport that is under the aegis of the FAA? It just doesn't sound that simple to me.
 
Once upon a time, when being investigated for a security clearance, the FBI agent asked me what I would do if someone threatened me with a gun. My response was to ask for LOTS of paper and pen and I would promptly start writing down everything I knew. I write software, for crying out loud, and not even classified stuff - just your ordinary, run of the mill database stuff. Now, who knows what was going into the database - not me, and I didn't want to know. That wasn't on my job description.

Why did I need the clearance? So I could go to the bathroom by myself and be able to escort unbadged people to the bathroom....(actually, to the bathroom door)
 
steingar said:
Hey, I was genuinely curious. But can Federal Marshals seize public lands, and can they close an airport that is under the aegis of the FAA? It just doesn't sound that simple to me.
Click to expand...
Why would they try to seize public land to settle a private debt? It's your house they come after if you don't pay a fine levied against you because you violated an airport security regulation, and they can most certainly do that. As for closing the airport, I don't think they can do that, but they could shut down air carrier operations into/out of that airport if the airport did not comply with security regulations.
 
Ron Levy said:
As you well know, any Federal agent (other than one working undercover) must identify him/herself with badge/credentials when making a demand like this. No creds, no authority.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what the correct credentials of a TSA agent would look like nor have I been trained to evaluate what they do show me to decide if it is real or fraudelent.
 
smigaldi said:
I have no idea what the correct credentials of a TSA agent would look like nor have I been trained to evaluate what they do show me to decide if it is real or fraudelent.
Click to expand...
I don't know how to tell a real from fake Boondock, Idaho, police badge/ID either, but I'll end up in jail for sure if a real Boondock cop shows me his ID and orders me to do something within his authority to require, and I don't do what I'm told. Guess that's why God gave you common sense.

In any event, if you're inside the AOA, and the person claiming TSA authority is outside and wants in but doesn't have the code or swipe card to do so, I don't think you'd get in trouble if you told that person you'd have to verify their identity before you let them in. In fact, I think you'd be doing exactly the right thing. But that's the sort of thing your airport badge training should cover.
 
Ron Levy said:
I don't know how to tell a real from fake Boondock, Idaho, police badge/ID either, but I'll end up in jail for sure if a real Boondock cop shows me his ID and orders me to do something within his authority to require, and I don't do what I'm told. Guess that's why God gave you common sense.
Click to expand...
Would common sense then be to believe that anything they show that looks quasi-official be good enough to let them in?

Ron Levy said:
In any event, if you're inside the AOA, and the person claiming TSA authority is outside and wants in but doesn't have the code or swipe card to do so, I don't think you'd get in trouble if you told that person you'd have to verify their identity before you let them in. In fact, I think you'd be doing exactly the right thing. But that's the sort of thing your airport badge training should cover.
Click to expand...
I would say the safe thing to do in that case is to deny entry and tell them that they need to contact the airport authorities and then walk away. Or call the police and report a possible security breach at the airport and let them deal with it. After all they are the ones trained to do that sort of thing and they will be able to verify if the creditials are valid.
 
"so therefore you will need to hold it, "

You've got to hold the other guy's THINGY??? :nono:
 
Ron Levy said:
On this "challenging" business, I think maybe somebody misunderstood what was said.
Click to expand...

I really don't think it's smart to just ASSUME that a first-person account of a security training was wrong. If we have doubts about the accuracy of the report, the rational response is to seek confirmation, not make assumptions.

For a variety of reasons, they cannot require a private citizen to enforce the law. About all they can require you to do would be to notify the appropriate security agency about folks in the area without a badge, and to not act to allow an unauthorized person entry (e.g., not to open the gate if an unauthorized person wants you to open the gate for them, and even then, you could be excused if you acted under duress, like a gun to your head).
Click to expand...

I hope you're right. I would like to believe that the TSA knows and stays within the limits of their power, but we keep hearing of counter-examples. And since the implementation of the security directive is reportedly being designed by each airport operator independently, I'm even less willing to just assume that everything is A-OK.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
You will be required to challenge any suspicious characters or unescorted individuals, and deny access to the AOA if they cannot provide a badge or proof of escort. As the airport ops stated, we are part of the security protocol at the airport.
Click to expand...

Would you mind asking the author of this report the following questions and letting us know the answers:

1. Did the people conducting the training really use the word "challenge"?

2. If so, did they describe what they meant by "challenge"?

Thanks in advance.
 
mikea said:
You don't REALLY think you'll get the TSA on a logic puzzle, do you, Captain Kirk? *

They just answer that that wasn't a real TSA agent and you shoudl have let the real TSA agent that didn't have a uniform, say anything or provide any ID in without any lip.

Need I remind that these are the guys who take butter knives away from the guy flying the jet.


* They'll just say they always win at Tic-tac-toe but the information is a matter of national security.
Click to expand...
Yes, I do think this would be a reasonable argument ... in court. I imagine there's a host of fundamental security issues around their goal to include private citizens in the airport security force. Constitutional issues, even.
 
Palmpilot said:
Would you mind asking the author of this report the following questions and letting us know the answers:

1. Did the people conducting the training really use the word "challenge"?

2. If so, did they describe what they meant by "challenge"?

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

When I had to do very similar training at KBED, they had a cheesy video showing you how to challenge someone. Basically, it was saying "may I please see your ID?", and if they refused you were required to call airport security and let them know.

What I want to know -- will we ever get this baloney at KPAO? I'm still amused by the new gates they installed. Very robust gates, code locks, with the codes being top secret (I don't know anyone who knows the codes). Fortunately, they are only 3' tall, so most adult-sized people can reach over and open them trivially...

Chris
 
smigaldi said:
Would common sense then be to believe that anything they show that looks quasi-official be good enough to let them in?
Click to expand...
Nope. But if someone with nothing but an ID card to justify their authority were authorized to enter, they'd be able to do it without your help. That's the common sense part.
I would say the safe thing to do in that case is to deny entry and tell them that they need to contact the airport authorities and then walk away. Or call the police and report a possible security breach at the airport and let them deal with it. After all they are the ones trained to do that sort of thing and they will be able to verify if the creditials are valid.
Click to expand...
I'm with ya all the way.
 
Palmpilot said:
I really don't think it's smart to just ASSUME that a first-person account of a security training was wrong. If we have doubts about the accuracy of the report, the rational response is to seek confirmation, not make assumptions.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Which is why I would have challenged the person who said that's what was said at the training. The report simply doesn't jibe with legal reality.
I hope you're right.
Click to expand...
I know I'm right about the TSA not being able to require private citizens to exercise police powers.
 
colohan said:
When I had to do very similar training at KBED, they had a cheesy video showing you how to challenge someone. Basically, it was saying "may I please see your ID?", and if they refused you were required to call airport security and let them know.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info.

The thing that bothers me about this is that if there is a realistic possibility of encountering a terrorist in this manner, then you're opening yourself up to the possibility of getting killed, and if there isn't a realistic possibility, then the whole program has no reason to exist.

Some have pointed out that dying to stop a terrorist attack is worth it, but if the terrorists kill you for discovering they don't have a badge, most likely they will just hide the body and continue with their plans, so your death will have been a waste.

What I want to know -- will we ever get this baloney at KPAO? I'm still amused by the new gates they installed. Very robust gates, code locks, with the codes being top secret (I don't know anyone who knows the codes). Fortunately, they are only 3' tall, so most adult-sized people can reach over and open them trivially...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've been meaning to take a picture of one of those gates and post it. I had the combination at one time, but I've long since forgotten it since there is no need for it.

I don't think we can assume that any airport is safe from the SS, oops, I mean TSA, because they seem to be determined to achieve absolute security, which is impossible. When it comes to areas of aviation they don't have much experience with, such as GA, their proposals and plans suggest that they have no clue as to what is a realistic risk and what isn't, nor what is likely to be an effective countermeasure.

Anyone who thinks the TSA is going to be reasonable needs to face up to the fact that they're requiring background checks for MULE DRIVERS, for Pete's sake. So what's the payload of a mule, and how does it compare to my Honda Civic? What's next, requiring badges and escorts before you can get out of your car at a gas station? I bet it would only take a couple of suicide bombings at gas stations before they started kicking that idea around.

Papieren, bitte?
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Exactly. Which is why I would have challenged the person who said that's what was said at the training. The report simply doesn't jibe with legal reality.
Click to expand...

Well, we have it from two different sources now. (See Chris Colohan's post.)

I know I'm right about the TSA not being able to require private citizens to exercise police powers.
Click to expand...

The fact that it's not legal for a governmental entity to do something does not mean they are not able to do it, and it can take a lot of money and a lot of lawyering to get them to stop. Even then there is no guarantee.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
Well, we have it from two different sources now. (See Chris Colohan's post.)
Click to expand...
Chris Colohan was discussing the training he received from Massport for an older, Massachusetts state requirement. Not the same training at all, and his training is about what I suggested would be appropriate -- and far from what the person quoted in the original post suggested.
The fact that it's not legal for a governmental entity to do something does not mean they are not able to do it, and it can take a lot of money and a lot of lawyering to get them to stop. Even then there is no guarantee.
Click to expand...
Well, I can't help you there. But that's not relevant to the issue of the airport badge rules, since you're speculating on government agencies or agents doing what they're not allowed to do. TSA already got its wrist slapped for doing that when a couple of local TSA honcos tried doing those bizav FBO baggage checks a few months ago -- and that stuff stopped, dead.

Will TSA folks overstep their authority? Almost certainly -- they're human, too, and some will have an overdeveloped sense of mission importance. Cops have done it for years, some have ended up in jail for it, and police departments have paid big damage awards when it has happened. That's the reality of life. But to suggest that TSA will institutionalize illegal practices like requiring badgeholders to do more than just report apparent violators and refuse to open gates for those they don't know to be legal is more unsupported conspiracy theory than rational legal likelihood.
 
Ron Levy said:
Exactly. Which is why I would have challenged the person who said that's what was said at the training. The report simply doesn't jibe with legal reality.
Click to expand...

Since when has THAT stopped the TSA? :dunno:

I'll let Pete provide verification, since he was actually there.
 
>Chris Colohan was discussing the training he received from Massport for an older,
> Massachusetts state requirement. Not the same training at all,

A point of clarification: his post of ~2:30pm today discussing challenge training is consistent with current ma$$port "security" training. If I'm mixing posts, I apologize.
 
Bob Noel said:
>Chris Colohan was discussing the training he received from Massport for an older,
> Massachusetts state requirement. Not the same training at all,

A point of clarification: his post of ~2:30pm today discussing challenge training is consistent with current ma$$port "security" training. If I'm mixing posts, I apologize.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was referring to Massport training I received about 3 years ago. I now fly out of KPAO, and have no experience with the latest TSA training.

Chris
 
Ron Levy said:
Exactly. Which is why I would have challenged the person who said that's what was said at the training. The report simply doesn't jibe with legal reality.
I know I'm right about the TSA not being able to require private citizens to exercise police powers.
Click to expand...

Well Ron, Like I said, that's not stopping them. I picked up the form we're supposed to sign at the airport tonight. Note in particular, items 3 and 6. Apparently, the report was spot-on (as I would expect from the person who sent it to me).

This **** is scary. :yikes::mad3:

attachment.php

attachment.php


I notice that there is no FAA or TSA logo on it, this is all local. WTF??? I smell an unfunded mandate. (No wonder the airport folks hate it.) There are also several of the rules that I cannot agree to, especially 2, 3, and 6.
 

Attachments

  • TSA@MSN001.jpg
    TSA@MSN001.jpg
    234.4 KB · Views: 219
  • TSA@MSN002.jpg
    TSA@MSN002.jpg
    56.7 KB · Views: 205
Line item veto the particular items you disagree with and turn it in.

Actually, what it sounds like needs to be done, is that NO ONE should apply for these badges, and call the police/TSA/DHS every time they want to go to their plane. Coordinate with other pilots to make it as big of a pain in the ass as you can for them. Go there at 3:15am, get somethng from your hangar, only need to be there for 5 minutes. Leave, wait 5 minutes, have the next guy call saying he needs to get in. Make it hell on anyone who can go up the ladder and say this is stupid.

During normal operating hours coordinate mass arrivals and or departures. Make sure to park on opposite sides of the ramp from others arriving, conveniently forget stuff, and start to walk back to the plane. Get little kids to arrive with you, make sure they have to pee really bad when you land, make sure every arriving plane has one of them. Make sure the kids throw a fit on the ramp, etc, etc, etc...

I think the best bet would be to NOT get the badge, and make it such a huge pain in the ass to "babysit" us that it goes away. Of course if the TSA repsonsd by hiring more mouth breathers to monitor the ramp, make sure all the pilots take a week long, or two week oong hiatus with minimal flying. Call the news media, show them the tax dollars being wasted on having 25 TSA agents standing around the GA ramp protecting nothing.

Refuse to get the badges...I think that's the best way to fight this nonsense.
 
EdFred said:
Line item veto the particular items you disagree with and turn it in.
Click to expand...

I totally would, if I thought for a second that it'd work. :frown2:

Actually, what it sounds like needs to be done, is that NO ONE should apply for these badges, and call the police/TSA/DHS every time they want to go to their plane. Coordinate with other pilots to make it as big of a pain in the ass as you can for them. Go there at 3:15am, get somethng from your hangar, only need to be there for 5 minutes. Leave, wait 5 minutes, have the next guy call saying he needs to get in. Make it hell on anyone who can go up the ladder and say this is stupid.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I think they'll just make an FBO lineman do it, and waste their time and cause us delays.

Refuse to get the badges...I think that's the best way to fight this nonsense.
Click to expand...

I think that's what I'll be doing... But I'm guessing that on our corner of the airport, nobody is really going to give a damn. :frown2:
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Well Ron, Like I said, that's not stopping them. I picked up the form we're supposed to sign at the airport tonight. Note in particular, items 3 and 6. Apparently, the report was spot-on (as I would expect from the person who sent it to me).

This **** is scary. :yikes::mad3:
Click to expand...

Thanks for providing that information. It's the worst case of bureacracy out of control that I've ever seen or heard of.

I still can't figure out how the TSA thinks unarmed personnel are going to be able to stop terrorists from carrying out their plans. If someone ever does encounter terrorists on the ramp, here's what I expect will NOT happen:

"Uh oh, Mohammed, we must abort the operation. This infidel found out we don't have badges."

"RUN!"

Here's what I expect WILL happen:

"Uh oh, Mohammed, we must abort the operation. This infidel found out we don't have badges."

"Ali, just kill him, dump the body between those two hangars, and continue with the plan."

By the way, regarding #13 on the application, if you get a chance to ask the airport operator, it would be interesting to have a citation to the statute or regulation number that you would be charged with violating.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top