SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
NPR reports
Passengers on a United Express flight from Chicago to Louisville, Ky., were horrified when a man was forcibly removed--violently wrenched from his seat and physically dragged down the aisle. [...] Videos of the scene have prompted calls to boycott United Airlines.
[...] The Chicago Department of Aviation [...] says the actions of the security officers were "not condoned by the Department" and that one individual has been placed on leave pending a review.
[...] Passengers had already boarded on Sunday evening [April 10] at O'Hare International Airport when United asked for volunteers to take another flight the next day to make room for four United staff members who needed seats.
The airline offered $400 and a free hotel, passenger Audra D. Bridges told the Louisville Courier-Journal. When no one volunteered, the offer was doubled to $800. When there were still no bites, the airline selected four passengers to leave the flight--including the man in the video and his wife.
"They told him he had been selected randomly to be taken off the flight", Bridges said.
[...] The man said he was a doctor and that he "needed to work at the hospital the next day", passenger Jayse D. Anspach said.
[...] Both Bridges and Anspach posted videos of three security officers, who appear to be wearing the uniforms of Chicago aviation police, wrenching the man out of his seat, prompting wails. His face appeared to strike an armrest. Then they dragged his limp body down the aisle.
Footage shows the man was bleeding from the mouth as they dragged him away. His glasses were askew and his shirt was riding up over his belly.
"It looked like he was knocked out, because he went limp and quiet and they dragged him out of the plane like a rag doll", Anspach wrote.
Previous: Days After United Settlement, Baggage Handler Locked in Cargo Hold on NC-to-DC Flight
(Score: 2) by goody on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:28PM (1 child)
I didn't intend on getting sucked into a discussion defending TSA. I'm not a TSA fan, far from it. But I would ask you, what alternative would you propose? For the sake of discussion, if you went to one extreme and fully removed TSA and had no screening, air travel would once again be a huge terrorism attack vector. If you removed the TSA and replaced it with something, it would probably end up looking a lot like the TSA. The old system prior to the TSA was arguably an inconsistent mess from airport to airport. The mere fact that we have some stats showing problems with the TSA screening speaks to a quality assurance process that is looking for vulnerabilities. Of course, the trick now is to fix those problems. It's easy to say "eliminate the TSA", in practice that's a disaster.
For an alternative, I would propose we should have something like the TSA Precheck program across the board, that is required of all travelers. The screening they doing in Precheck is minimal and fast, faster and less thorough than screening in pre-TSA days. You would have to get registered and cleared ahead of time, something which may be difficult with infrequent travelers like little old ladies and families going to Disneyworld once in a lifetime. I'm sure plenty of people would complain about the inconvenience of having to get Precheck certified and armchair constitutionalists will scream bloody murder and threaten insurrection. I get the feeling TSA is heading in this direction anyways. They've been really promoting Precheck and reducing the number of agents, to the point where a few months ago their cuts to agent numbers outpaced Precheck adoption and regular (non-Precheck) screening wait times increased.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday April 13 2017, @06:18PM
First of all, how exactly do you conclude that it is necessary? If damn near any prohibited item gets through their screening right now, what exactly are they doing that's so necessary? Locking the cockpit doors was a great step, passengers knowing the risks and not expecting the hijacker to just take them to some remote airport and let them go also helps a lot. THOSE are what have stopped the terrorist attacks since 9/11, not the TSA. And not only does the TSA not stop the attacks, they also *create new ones* -- there have been terrorist attacks at the now centralized and congested TSA checkpoints too. Not stopping attacks while also creating new targets sure sounds like a step backward to me.
So, what should we do? First, basic passive security like the locked cockpit doors. That alone may be enough, but if you want to go further I wouldn't necessarily disagree as long as it's done with some basic level of intelligence and thought, which the entire TSA currently seems to lack. When I take a train, they sometimes have bomb/drug sniffing dogs roaming the station...and maybe a uniformed cop or two nearby...but that's about it. Those dogs tend to be far more effective than the overpriced scanner machines purchased from those friends of the TSA bosses. But they aren't basing their security techniques on any kind of scientific evidence or proven track records, they're basing it on corruption, bribery, and cosmetic appearance (ie, "Security Theater".) Instead of the cuddly friendly thing that can smell the drugs up your...body cavities...they go with the big high tech nudie scanners that get fooled by wrinkled fabric -- looks scarier, but it's garbage. You could maybe argue about allergies or phobias for dogs, but if it works at a train station it ought to work at an airport. And the TSA doesn't exactly hire skilled, intelligent, law-abiding agents either. We've got TSA agents molesting children, smuggling weapons, engaging in acts of terrorism, sexually assaulting people...and of course that's because the job sucks and the pay sucks and that may legitimately be the best they can hire...and the pay sucks because apparently nobody thinks the job is all that important. And they seem to be right about that. I really don't think there would be much risk in disbanding the entire organization today, but if we DO actually need security, then we need PROVEN and EFFECTIVE security, not just some low wage clown in a uniform trying to look intimidating.