| Security was handled (owned) by airports since the dawn of time. Airports with high risk (JFK) had higher security, airports with lower security (SAT). Airports hired typical staff from the local community and you would go through a metal detector and someone would X-Ray your luggage to make sure there were no obvious bombs in there. Your family could meet you at the gate. Originally when the TSA was invented, airports were allowed to do their own security, TSA was optional. Now, airports that already have TSA are not allowed to provide their own security, it is mandatory they hire federal union employees. WHY is it necessary for municipal airports to hire federal union employees? Airports know their own local risk factor and can adequately manage those employees. Airports want their passengers to have a good experience, so that they come back. This is why they pay big bucks for rennovations, why they have the bad-ok-good-better-best colored buttons in the restrooms and everything else. The airport has virtually no control over the staff running security. They can't overschedule employees for busy times and holidays, they're beholden to what the TSA does. And yeah, they do regular tests of the TSA to see how much contraband they can slip past security. TSA regularly fails these tests/audits. The rest of the world does not deal with the level of security as american airports, and nobody else is having problems. US airports are still running at/above 9/11 security levels... why? In most countries you aren't required to take off your shoes or walk through anything more invasive than a simple metal detector. 1. Abolish the TSA. Allow local airports to hire and manage their own staff (currently not allowed)
2. Adjust minimum standards up and down based on current thread level (don't force people wearing flip flops to take off their shoes) TSA was a huge mistake and is absolutely security theater. Every other country in the world does a better job of managing risk at airports than the US. |