US carry-on luggage regulation before congress

[rdenney]

That item about Netanyahu's security says it all about the TSA. You need not know anything else.

And I'm sure the US will reimburse them for the loss. Try getting that when your cameras are stolen the same way.

Please think about what you are saying. It does not say anything about the TSA with any certainty--the TSA is not the only organization that handles bags en-route. The baggage handlers for the airlines do all of the handling after the security inspection. And you do need to know much more before making such speculative accusations. One thing that is useful to know when assessing motives is who within the handling process has how much at stake, and what scrutiny are they subjected to.

TSA agents, as employees of the federal government, are risking a lot by stealing. They would be immediately fired, and would likely lose the government's contributions to their retirement systems, in addition to the loss of retirement health benefits. They would be debarred from future government service even as a contractor. Then they would be criminally prosecuted. It is very likely that in a high-profile case such as stealing weapons, their whole chain of command would be flushed, meaning that those people would end up being transferred to other jobs in other places and placed under closer scrutiny. I would be willing to bet that all TSA handling areas are under surveillance. There is a lot at stake for a government employee, and a lot of scrutiny. I would be willing to bet that ever TSA employee who came within 50 feet of Netanyahu's security guy's bag will be identified and questioned, if not investigated, including review of those surveillance recordings, if they exist.

Also, the TSA is part of the Department of Homeland Security, and the security check for their employees (like all government employees) includes a criminal background check with fingerprinting, done by the FBI. That's in addition to whatever DHS does because they are DHS. This process usually takes about 8 weeks for run-of-the-mill federal employees who have the minimum "public trust" clearance.

Baggage handlers for the airlines have not nearly so much at stake as employees, and their employers are not routinely and directly held accountable for damage to or loss from bags.

Another point is that baggage handlers perform 100% of the tasks related to routing bags to their destinations. If this bag was routed to the wrong destination, then it is an airline baggage handler (or gate agent) who made the mistake, not a TSA inspector. Once routed to the wrong destination, it is up the airlines to store the bag, and find it when it is reported missing. During that entire time, the bag is in the hands of airline baggage handlers, often after the bag has spun a few times around the wrong carousel at the wrong airport baggage claim area. During that time, it could have been opened and inspected by any member of the public.

The solution for musicians is equipment insurance with coverage for all losses. I have such insurance for my musical instruments, and it required supplying the insurance company with appraisals of the instruments to verify my ownership before the loss. They are covered against any damage or loss except rot and vermin. Considering the high likelihood of damage to large, fragile instruments such as tubas, the insurance is quite cheap, with about $40,000 in replacement-value coverage for less than a coupla hundred bucks a year. Tubas aren't necessarily all that desirable as items of theft, but that insurance can also be applied to far more attractive items at the same rates, including guitars and drums. A couple of my instruments are not replaceable, and it is an imperfect response to a deplorable situation, but it's better than kicking the dirt. Is such coverage available for photography equipment? I'm sure that it is, in a specially formulated inland marine policy.

Rick "injecting a little reality into speculative accusations" Denney

[John Jarosz]

It does not say anything about the TSA with any certainty

Well, I've been told many times that the TSA is to provide a secure area inside their perimeter. Doesn't seem very secure to me. And the point you make about high profile cases (and I believe everyone is entitled to the same level of security) makes the TSA appear even more inept. The government only wants you to think that you are being protected by the TSA. The proof is that crap like this goes on inside their secure perimeter and they can't seem to ever find who does it. The TSA is primarily there as theatre, and there is no actual security or it would take you 5 hours to get to your gate or they would need 100 times the personnel who were really intelligwent and trained. IOW, we can't afford it.

I would be willing to bet that ever TSA employee who came within 50 feet of Netanyahu's security guy's bag will be identified and questioned, if not investigated, including review of those surveillance recordings, if they exist.

Yours or my luggage will never get that effort if anything ever disappears from our checked baggage.

I don't want to debate this further so I'm finished with the subject.

[rdenney]

I don't want to debate this further so I'm finished with the subject.

I feel this way too when arguing against someone who has a larger store of facts than I do. And that happens frequently enough.

The TSA does not guarantee anything inside their security perimeter, nor is their mission to keep airline baggage handlers from filching possessions. They have aided those activities primarily by prohibiting useful locks, but not because there is any evidence of their own thievery.

Whether the TSA is or is not needed is a completely separate discussion. Don't accuse them of thievery in the absence of investigated facts just because you don't like the idea of their existence.

Rick "noting that damage to and theft from baggage predates the existence of the TSA, which is why everyone had and used locks before 9/11" Denney

[Dan Fromm]

Um, Rick, with respect to cameras TSA is a great danger.

When they open a checked bag they sometimes dump the contents onto a table, then stuff them back in. This procedure can be hard on fragile equipment.

What doesn't go into one checked bag goes into another. I once arrived in Costa Rica with, um, feminine undergarments mixed in with my scrambled clean clothes, courtesy of the inspectors. My wife was, fortunately, amused. I don't know how the lady whose panties the inspectors gave me felt.

As for musical instruments, there are very good reasons why cellos fly as regular passengers. Unlike guitars, cellos are not for smashing.

[Bob Salomon]

In today's Newark Star Ledger there as an article about a TSA inspector at Newark Airport who was just arreted for stealin a computer from lost and found at the airport.

I feel this way too when arguing against someone who has a larger store of facts than I do. And that happens frequently enough.

The TSA does not guarantee anything inside their security perimeter, nor is their mission to keep airline baggage handlers from filching possessions. They have aided those activities primarily by prohibiting useful locks, but not because there is any evidence of their own thievery.

Whether the TSA is or is not needed is a completely separate discussion. Don't accuse them of thievery in the absence of investigated facts just because you don't like the idea of their existence.

Rick "noting that damage to and theft from baggage predates the existence of the TSA, which is why everyone had and used locks before 9/11" Denney

[rdenney]

Um, Rick, with respect to cameras TSA is a great danger.

When they open a checked bag they sometimes dump the contents onto a table, then stuff them back in. This procedure can be hard on fragile equipment.

What doesn't go into one checked bag goes into another. I once arrived in Costa Rica with, um, feminine undergarments mixed in with my scrambled clean clothes, courtesy of the inspectors. My wife was, fortunately, amused. I don't know how the lady whose panties the inspectors gave me felt.

As for musical instruments, there are very good reasons why cellos fly as regular passengers. Unlike guitars, cellos are not for smashing.

Yes, the fragility of equipment and the respect for that fragility is a different subject than stealing. In this case, both the TSA agents and the airline baggage handlers are each likely to show insufficient respect for private property.

But it's the difference between incompetence and corruption. The two should not be confused. Government incompetence is rampant because the consequences are minimal; corruption is not because the consequences if caught are severe.

I can see some inspector stuffing panties from a different bag into your bag and giggling about it. Even that is in a whole different category of crime than stealing cameras and guns. But even that would get them fired if caught.

If I checked camera equipment, I would put it in a case that could only hold the equipment one way, or that would protect it no matter how they loaded it. I've done that with test equipment and the agents don't mess that up.

Rick "forewarned is forearmed" Denney

[rdenney]

In today's Newark Star Ledger there as an article about a TSA inspector at Newark Airport who was just arreted for stealin a computer from lost and found at the airport.

There will always be examples. But the fact that you saw the report demonstrates the consequences.

I wonder if it would have been easier for a baggage handler to get away with it so that you would never have seen the report.

Rick "who doesn't check valuables" Denney

[Dan Fromm]

Um, Rick, y'r argument that deterrence, in this case the risk of losing a job and pension, works is as good as the argument that tort law is adequate to prevent disasters such as the current BP disaster.

[rdenney]

Um, Rick, y'r argument that deterrence, in this case the risk of losing a job and pension, works is as good as the argument that tort law is adequate to prevent disasters such as the current BP disaster.

The BP disaster doesn't undermine that argument at all. It is the first such disaster in how many years? And the effect of liability on BP is going to add new zeal to the care shown by other companies in the same business.

Some time ago, an employee of my agency was escorted to the door for misusing his government travel card. He was not even stealing--he always paid the bill. But he was violating policy and he was fired. I can assure you with great conviction that the rest of us are doubly careful about knowing and following that policy down to the last detail because of that. There is too much at stake.

Some people have to learn every lesson the hard way, it is true. But I'll still bet that the bulk of filching from customer baggage is coming from those who have far less at stake--the airline baggage handlers. Accusing the TSA agents of rampant stealing as reported in this thread, just because they are government employees, isn't realistic or fair. Accusing them of incompetence--well--that's just going with the percentages.

Rick "not blaming malice for what can be explained by incompetence" Denney

[Dan Fromm]

Rick, y'r argument is as good as the one advanced by some economists (not this one) that concern for reputation would keep bankers and brokers honest.

That said, the question of who steals more often from checked baggage is an empirical one that can't be settled by fantasizing about which class of thief has more to lose if caught. Are you aware of any data that might settle the question? I'm not.