TSA and their "No Fly" list ...

[Charinida]

One of the things I hate ... And yes, I've seen it where a child is unable to get a seat (intially when checking in) due to the name being on the list...

Lots of Smiths, Jones, Garcias, Sanchez, Patels et al...

Today's Sanity Check had me smiling - http://www.sanity-check.net/

Yeah... To get thru the security checkpoint here, in O'Hare, even pets need a security checkpoint gate pass.

Makes no sense at all...

Then you have the "Elite" folks who whine and complain about it saying it...

But if anything, I'm glad they are doing bag searches... I've seen a lot of stuff they have confiscated during the searches, and it amazes me as to what people pack in their bags. And worrysome in wondering what was sent thru *BEFORE* the TSA did bag searches.

One day, last week, when I told someone they need to repack their bags (23kg weight limit first of all), he had like 10 bottles of Fuel Injector cleaning/HEET type thingies, Raid/OFF and some other stuff. Needless to say, he wasn't happy when I told him he either need to ditch the fuel stuff and the other offending items (HAZMAT stuff) or the bag won't go. And nope, we weren't going to reimburse him for it.

And yes, we have seen kitchen sinks, tires and such. And people still want to try and take air conditioners/mini-fridges and such. Much fun when telling them no, then they go "No understand english."

 

[Dakota Duce]

Yes but..

What prevents the TSA people from using "Common Sense".. or is that against the rules and regulations too?

Dakota Duce

"May All Your Flights Be Of Good Weather!"

 

[gismo]

Yes but..

What prevents the TSA people from using "Common Sense".. or is that against the rules and regulations too?

This would require "Independent Thought" and that's definitely against the rules.

 

[wsuffa]

This would require "Independent Thought" and that's definitely against the rules.

Generally, law enforcement doesn't want people who will think independently. Just follow orders, don't question them.

 

[ausrere]

Generally, law enforcement doesn't want people who will think independently. Just follow orders, don't question them.

I don't think that's an accurate statement at all. Military I can see, but civilian law enforcement generally wants people who CAN think independently and quickly (within the bounds of standard operating procedures). Rarely is there a supervisor around to give you an order when the **** hits the fan in the civilian world.

Now feds... and TSA specifically.. that may be the case (no independent thinking), but please don't generalize law enforcement as a whole that way.

 

[poadeleted4]

Sorry Lisa. Bill is right on the money on this one.

Many people have been turned down by our local law enforcement for being "over qualified" or "too intelligent".

They want followers, not leaders.

Sorry, but true.
Gary

 

[wsuffa]

I don't think that's an accurate statement at all. Military I can see, but civilian law enforcement generally wants people who CAN think independently and quickly (within the bounds of standard operating procedures). Rarely is there a supervisor around to give you an order when the **** hits the fan in the civilian world.

Now feds... and TSA specifically.. that may be the case (no independent thinking), but please don't generalize law enforcement as a whole that way.

Lisa,

You may be correct where you work, but I know a number of folks that tried to get into law enforcement but were rejected or discouraged for just the reasons I mentioned. I also knew a few on the Fed side of things (long time ago), and unless you were in management, the mentality was "follow orders, don't think". I personally think this does a great disservice to people who are quite qualified. And I also think we would be better off as a nation if we allowed some judgement in the field. I know there are folks that disagree with my thoughts.

Sorry for generalizing....

bill

 

[ausrere]

Sorry Lisa. Bill is right on the money on this one.

Many people have been turned down by our local law enforcement for being "over qualified" or "too intelligent".

They want followers, not leaders.

Sorry, but true.
Gary

That's too bad Gary. I certainly hope that as a citizen of your city and state you voice your opinion about your local law enforcement officials hiring less than qualified people if that's what is happening.

I can tell you that I'm in the middle of doing interviews and hiring of several officers, and I wouldn't hire anyone that needs a supervisor to dictate their every move. I want intelligent, qualified people that I can send out to do a job independently and without being micro managed. I have enough to do! ;-)

 

[Ken Ibold]

Lisa,

You may be correct where you work, but I know a number of folks that tried to get into law enforcement but were rejected or discouraged for just the reasons I mentioned. I also knew a few on the Fed side of things (long time ago), and unless you were in management, the mentality was "follow orders, don't think". I personally think this does a great disservice to people who are quite qualified. And I also think we would be better off as a nation if we allowed some judgement in the field. I know there are folks that disagree with my thoughts.

Sorry for generalizing....

Wait a minute. WAIT A MINUTE!! Where's the swearing? Where's the personal attack? The name calling? The total intolerance of anyone who disagrees with the most outlandish thing you can think of?!?!?!

Oh, what? This is PoA?

Nevermind.

 

[ausrere]

Lisa,

You may be correct where you work, but I know a number of folks that tried to get into law enforcement but were rejected or discouraged for just the reasons I mentioned. I also knew a few on the Fed side of things (long time ago), and unless you were in management, the mentality was "follow orders, don't think". I personally think this does a great disservice to people who are quite qualified. And I also think we would be better off as a nation if we allowed some judgement in the field. I know there are folks that disagree with my thoughts.

Sorry for generalizing....

bill

Unfortunately, I know of departments who will discourage or reject qualified people as a routine part of the screening process. Their line of thinking is that those with a genuine desire to work there will apply again. Those that take the initial rejection obviously don't have a strong enough desire to get into the field as far as they are concerned. I disagree with that line of thinking. I personally think they get more stubborn less than qualified applicants that way. I think it shows now too with the bad press those departments have suffered with over recent years.

I have also found that although some people look absolutely stunning on paper, we ultimately find they are not cut out for this line of work. Good background checks weed out lots of otherwise "stunning" applicants.

The feds are a world unto themselves. I've yet to figure out their selection process. I've done background checks on people that I was unable to find anything even remotely resembling a reason to reject them, yet the feds had done just that. We hired them, and they turned out to be excellent officers. I've also met, and worked with federal officers that couldn't find a criminal if they were held up by one, and who had backgrounds that would be rejected by a reality TV series producer, yet they continue to work cases. Of course, I've also met and worked with federal officers who were the smartest, most dedicated officers I know.

Sorry about the rant. It's the generalization that got my goat. Law Enforcement is no different than any other profession. You are going to find really good agencies and officers, and you'll find those that stink. But it's my firm belief that there are many more dedicated, independently thinking officers out there than not.

 

[wsuffa]

Sorry about the rant. It's the generalization that got my goat. Law Enforcement is no different than any other profession. You are going to find really good agencies and officers, and you'll find those that stink. But it's my firm belief that there are many more dedicated, independently thinking officers out there than not.

Lisa, thanks for your comments. I shouldn't have generalized, I should have only spoken in my experience.

You are correct, there are a lot of good folks out there (including the DPS folks that occupy the T-Hangar next to mine down here in San Antonio).

I've apparently not been very good with my postings the past couple of days.

best,

bill