
Disabled teen sues TSA, Memphis airport after bloody scuffle - jackgavigan
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/disabled-teen-sues-tsa-memphis-airport-after-bloody-scuffle/
======
JustSomeNobody
Since the U.S. really doesn't have a terrorism problem the TSA, for the most
part, has absolutely nothing to do except get themselves into conflicts with
people. They're like paid bullies.

The problem with terrorism in the U.S. isn't that there are actual
terrorists[0], but that there is a crapton of money to be made making the
American people feel unsafe.

[0] Sure, there's an attack on occasion. But you're more likely to die choking
on a soda watching GoT.

~~~
Smushman
Well stated.

As long as there is money to be made and jobs to be had, our elected officials
will continue to look the other way when it comes to incidents like this.

Security theatre was job one behind the creation of the TSA; job two was a
huge employment drive for the people under the auspice of a benevolent
organization.

Since these two drivers are so deeply embedded in the duties that government
understands as its primary mandates, there is no way they can see any faults
in the system.

Also, consider what would happen if we eliminated the TSA

TSA has 62,000 employees and an annual budget in 2013 of $7.9 billion
[[http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/homeland-
security/tsa](http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/homeland-security/tsa)]

Laying off 62,000 people from the government payroll and eliminating $8
billion in funding would constitute a significant hit on the economy, and
practically guarantees you won't be re-elected.

~~~
basseq
The economic impacts plus the cover-your-ass excuse in the event of a
terrorist attack makes eliminating the TSA political suicide. Which drives me
crazy because _it 's the right move_. The TSA does not protect the U.S. and
the government is not a jobs program.

You could give everyone at the TSA a $50k severance package and still recoup
$4B. But the moment something happens, all the fingers are pointed your way.
Wrongfully, of course, but human beings are bad at weighing risk and hindsight
is 20/20.

~~~
Smushman
An excellent point I failed to include.

------
throwaway049
From the article: "our bags had gone to Chattanooga" After all that, they
dropped the ball on the sensible security measure of never allowing bags to
fly without their owners.

~~~
CPLX
That's not actually a security measure any more. Bags fly without owners all
the time, for example when you check in late and the bag misses your flight
and gets on the next one.

The prevalence of suicide attacks made the idea of bag matching as a way to
prevent bombings somewhat obsolete. They still do remove bags from the flight
if you miss it, ostensibly for this reason, but at least in theory they solve
the problem of explosives in bags by scanning and searching checked luggage as
well, which they didn't used to do in the old days.

~~~
dogma1138
They do but they are also separately inspected. The normal SOP even for the
shoddy US airline security is when a passenger with checked in luggage doesn't
board the flight the aircraft is to be deboarded and the luggage searched.
This is twice true when the passenger has been taken out of the flight by
airport security even tho in this case it was utter stupidity and abuse.

------
2close4comfort
So what has the TSA actually found/done since its creation that would be
considered beneficial? Anything?

~~~
lojack
Well there hasn't been a major attack on the US transportation systems since
it was created. It's hard to say if this is a direct result of the TSA, but
I'd also hesitate to say that they failed their mission.

~~~
bhickey
I bought tiger repellant from a door-to-door salesman. No tiger attacks to
date.

~~~
lojack
To that I'd say it could be a good purchase if you had a tiger problem before
buying it.

~~~
filoeleven
One anamolous attack does not a tiger problem make.

~~~
lojack
I think this is where some people may disagree

~~~
basseq
If the chance of a tiger attack is 0.1%, and I sell you tiger repellent that's
99% effective, how good is the tiger repellent?

------
whamlastxmas
This is a pretty one-sided story. I dislike the TSA as much as anyone, but I
doubt the employees are intentionally harming some disabled young lady. From
what I can tell, she tried running away, they tried to stop her, and she fell
to the ground hitting her head. It's unfortunate, and ultimately the TSA needs
to be more accommodating of allowing guardians accompanying their dependents
to help prevent these issues. But this is a non-story really.

~~~
kafkaesq
_From what I can tell, she tried running away, they tried to stop her, and she
fell to the ground hitting her head._

No, she didn't just "fall", apparently. The article clearly implies that they
forced her to the ground:

 _She 's trying to get away from them but in the next instant, one of them had
her down on the ground and hit her head on the floor. There was blood
everywhere," Shirley Cohen told WREG-TV._

The language of the lawsuit concurs (in its use of the term "assault"). I
assume you're not suspecting that they would use that term frivolously.

 _But this is a non-story really._

Very sadly, it isn't. The actions of the TSA employees most like weren't
"intentional" in the sense that it wasn't like they specifically planned to
take the course of action that they did. But the bigger fact remains that
these people are (1) obviously inadequately trained in dealing with people
with disabilities, (2) not only lacking in empathy, but -- again, by training
-- apparently in "attack mode", or always on the verge of it.

~~~
pc86
I'm not pretending I have the facts of what happened, but your rebuttal to
"From what I can tell, she tried running away, they tried to stop her, and she
fell to the ground hitting her head." is a quote of the person suing the TSA.
Not an unbiased source in the slightest.

Presumably there are multiple angles of security footage to show exactly what
happened.

~~~
kafkaesq
_Your rebuttal... is a quote of the person suing the TSA._

It was offered as a counterpoint to "she fell to the ground". Which was pure
speculation, suggested by someone who wasn't even there.

~~~
pc86
My only point was that the rebuttal is a quote from someone who will make a
quick $100k if her account is taken at face value. And even with a less
pessimistic view of human nature, she's very closely emotionally involved, so
even _if_ her daughter just fell she might believe she was tackled.

~~~
kafkaesq
By Occam's razor, though, most likely things went down (as it were) pretty
much the way her mother said they did.

(You can default to the belief that she's just out for quick buck, and/or too
emotionally fragile to make heads or tails of what actually happened, if you
want to; but -- again, knowing the TSA, and their widely documented proclivity
for callous and indefensible stunts like these -- I don't find either of those
scenarios especially likely).

------
aminorex
She was attacked by a cop. Happens all the time. The only reason it was news
is that she was a sympathetic victim. A healthy black man? Forget about it.

~~~
pc86
TSA agents are not police officers, despite what they may tell you. There is
no reason to bring racial nonsense into this.

