I personally think it should only be a few selected TSA officers who have to go through the same type of training that law enforcement officers have to. This is regarding the shooting in LA with that TSA officer that was shot and left to bleed out for almost 30 minutes before he died.

 

What do you guys think?

Edited November 17, 201312 yr by Darkangel

I agree with you, or maybe increased police presence at airports. 

Fuck that! there are WAY too many issues with firearms as it is, even LEO's misuse them sometimes but that's all part of being an LEO, I've heard some pretty disturbing stories about TSA Agents.. I won't EVER fly anywhere in the U.S.. TSA are the last people i'd ever give a firearm to.. I read an article somewhere there is some sort of Unit consisting of Federal Agents and TSA working together as some Anti Highway Terrorism Unit.. The one Government group I think should be completely disbanded..

I think they should absorb the TSA into the CBP as a devoted "Aviation Security Division" type unit, and thus all officers would be sworn-in federal agents/officers with full powers and equipment.

Fuck that! there are WAY too many issues with firearms as it is, even LEO's misuse them sometimes but that's all part of being an LEO, I've heard some pretty disturbing stories about TSA Agents.. I won't EVER fly anywhere in the U.S.. TSA are the last people i'd ever give a firearm to.. I read an article somewhere there is some sort of Unit consisting of Federal Agents and TSA working together as some Anti Highway Terrorism Unit.. The one Government group I think should be completely disbanded..

This sounds to me like the most uneducated post that I've heard in the past year on these forums. The issue is not with the firearm itself, it's with the people that they are given to. You state in your post that LEO's misuse weapons sometimes, but "that's all part of being an LEO". How on earth does the job description of an LEO include the misuse of weapons?

 

Regardless, provided the TSA personnel in question has had the correct criminal record check and psych evaluation, I see no problem in arming them, provided that it will increase the security in airports and reduce the demand of police officers.

 

To not fly within the US because of stories that you've heard about the TSA is completely ridiculous, so many people pass through the US airports every day without any problems at all. It seems to me as though you've opposed the main post, without any credible evidence or reasoning.

This sounds to me like the most uneducated post that I've heard in the past year on these forums. The issue is not with the firearm itself, it's with the people that they are given to. You state in your post that LEO's misuse weapons sometimes, but "that's all part of being an LEO". How on earth does the job description of an LEO include the misuse of weapons?

 

Regardless, provided the TSA personnel in question has had the correct criminal record check and psych evaluation, I see no problem in arming them, provided that it will increase the security in airports and reduce the demand of police officers.

 

To not fly within the US because of stories that you've heard about the TSA is completely ridiculous, so many people pass through the US airports every day without any problems at all. It seems to me as though you've opposed the main post, without any credible evidence or reasoning.

While I do take great offence to your post, i'm gonna say read between the lines.. if I could write it out in crayon for you.. I most certainly would.. what I was meaning was, mistakes are made with firearms, especially with Law Enforcement, unnecessary use of force etc..

 

I'm sure cops get "correct criminal background checks" & "psych evaluations" yet, they use unnecessary use of force, PTSD from the job.. why not just add fuel to fire, right?

Tell me why I need to provide reasoning or "credible evidence" when I don't need to justify myself to you at all?

May I ask about a personal experience of YOURS with the TSA? i'd love to hear about your reasoning and personal experience or why they even need to be armed at all.

 

EDIT: Where am I supposed to get this "credible evidence" other than the news?

Edited November 17, 201312 yr by Slimory

While I do take great offence to your post, i'm gonna say read between the lines.. if I could write it out in crayon for you.. I most certainly would.. what I was meaning was, mistakes are made with firearms, especially with Law Enforcement, unnecessary use of force etc..

 

I'm sure cops get "correct criminal background checks" & "psych evaluations" yet, they use unnecessary use of force, PTSD from the job.. why not just add fuel to fire, right?

Tell me why I need to provide reasoning or "credible evidence" when I don't need to justify myself to you at all?

May I ask about a personal experience of YOURS with the TSA? i'd love to hear about your reasoning and personal experience or why they even need to be armed at all.

What you meant was different from what you posted. Hence, why I picked up on what you said. You don't need to write it out in crayon for me, I can read your post just fine. 

 

Mistakes are made with cars, people die in accidents. Should we stop the general public from having those? No.

Mistakes are made with knives, people are injured in the workplace. Should we stop producing knives? No.

 

I'm sure that the TSA are less susceptible to PTSD when compared to TSA agents. Besides, if the TSA were armed, and the stress upon police is reduced as a result, then that may reduce the risk of the police suffering from such conditions such as stress itself.

 

I don't see how any fuel is being added to the fire, please expand on this point.

 

You're in a public forum, attempting to refute a opinion of another member. Sure, you don't have to justify your reasoning, but if you want anyone to take you seriously, it's probably a good idea to do so.

 

My reasoning is that the TSA help protect the innocent travelers using the american tranport links everyday, and routinely confiscate weapons from those trying to harm them. In the event of an emergency involving a criminal with a weapon, they must wait for the police, putting more strain on them, and increasing the time in which it takes for the situation to be resolved, thus putting more lives at risk. 

 

If they were able to resolve the situation themselves, the stress on the police would be decreased, and more lives could be saved. In my opinion, they're doing a very important job that could put them in danger at a moments notice.

 

I've seen the TSA confiscate a hidden blade from a passenger in LAX myself who was passing through security ahead of me. If that passenger has become deranged, they could have attacked the TSA officer conducting the search, or could have turned on any of us nearby. If they had gotten that weapon on board their flight, god knows what could've happened. 

 

So there's my reasoning and experience. Where's yours?

Edited November 17, 201312 yr by Tom H

What you meant was different from what you posted. Hence, why I picked up on what you said. You don't need to write it out in crayon for me, I can read your post just fine. 

 

Mistakes are made with cars, people die in accidents. Should we stop the general public from having those? No.

Mistakes are made with knives, people are injured in the workplace. Should we stop producing knives? No.

 

I'm sure that the TSA are less susceptible to PTSD when compared to TSA agents. Besides, if the TSA were armed, and the stress upon police is reduced as a result, then that may reduce the risk of the police suffering from such conditions such as stress itself.

 

I don't see how any fuel is being added to the fire, please expand on this point.

 

You're in a public forum, attempting to refute a opinion of another member. Sure, you don't have to justify your reasoning, but if you want anyone to take you seriously, it's probably a good idea to do so.

 

My reasoning is that the TSA help protect the innocent travelers using the american tranport links everyday, and routinely confiscate weapons from those trying to harm them. In the event of an emergency involving a criminal with a weapon, they must wait for the police, putting more strain on them, and increasing the time in which it takes for the situation to be resolved, thus putting more lives at risk. 

 

If they were able to resolve the situation themselves, the stress on the police would be decreased, and more lives could be saved. In my opinion, they're doing a very important job that could put them in danger at a moments notice.

 

I've seen the TSA confiscate a hidden blade from a passenger in LAX myself who was passing through security ahead of me. If that passenger has become deranged, they could have attacked the TSA officer conducting the search, or could have turned on any of us nearby. If they had gotten that weapon on board their flight, god knows what could've happened. 

 

So there's my reasoning and experience. Where's yours?

Tell me how constantly arming people is a good thing? do you know what the blade was for? what kind of knife it was? why do THEY need to be armed? if they shoot someone who has a knife, whos' getting charged? I doubt the guy wielding the knife.. I would assume they would be trained to disarm people with some sort of disarming training.. I know I have to with my job & I don't get a firearm.. why? because I don't need one.. if anything, Tazers' may be acceptable, guns don't always solve problems, they can create more & I find people in position of power and/or are armed tend to abuse that, no testing or evaluations can cure someone from abusing their power, I call this a power trip, which is my reasoning behind arming everyone, it may take stress away from the police, even so, guns are not required, a tazer can be equipped just as fast as a handgun & be less deadly (unless not used properly)..

 

As for my personal experience, I don't have one, because I rarely fly & we don't have TSA Agents, we do have Airport Security, but nothing as crazy as the U.S.

 

TSA could still have PTSD from being in the Military or even passed Law Enforcement.

 

EDIT: You basically called me an idiot, so expect to get the same treatment if you feel the need to start insulting.

Edited November 17, 201312 yr by Slimory

hell no we don't really need the tsa anyways just armed security

hell no we don't really need the tsa anyways just armed security

If that was sarcasm.. as far as I know our Airport Security isn't armed.

 

Tell me how constantly arming people is a good thing? do you know what the blade was for? what kind of knife it was? why do THEY need to be armed? if they shoot someone who has a knife, whos' getting charged? I doubt the guy wielding the knife.. I would assume they would be trained to disarm people with some sort of disarming training.. I know I have to with my job & I don't get a firearm.. why? because I don't need one.. if anything, Tazers' may be acceptable, guns don't always solve problems, they can create more & I find people in position of power and/or are armed tend to abuse that, no testing or evaluations can cure someone from abusing their power, I call this a power trip, which is my reasoning behind arming everyone, it may take stress away from the police, even so, guns are not required, a tazer can be equipped just as fast as a handgun & be less deadly (unless not used properly)..

 

As for my personal experience, I don't have one, because I rarely fly & we don't have TSA Agents, we do have Airport Security, but nothing as crazy as the U.S.

 

TSA could still have PTSD from being in the Military or even passed Law Enforcement.

 

EDIT: You basically called me an idiot, so expect to get the same treatment if you feel the need to start insulting.

Why don't you respond to half of the points before jumping mid way through my post?

 

At no point did I say that constantly arming people was a good thing. We're talking about the possibility of a specific set of people using firearms to improve the safety of innocent bystanders..

 

Yes, the blade was a fixed hilt hunting knife made from ABS plastic that was approximately 6" long. Virtually undetectable to metal detectors. Since the passenger concealing the weapon did not declare it, nor declare himself as an LEO, I doubt it was very much for cutting his sandwiches. Especially when it was strapped to his inner thigh.

 

They need to be armed in case the passenger had chosen to attack them whilst they were carrying out their job, especially when weapons, such as knives or potentially firearms could be involved.

 

Ory, according to your facebook profile, you're currently working as a "Loss Prevention Officer" AKA a store security guard. Didn't realize that you encountered many knives whilst stopping your little kiddies from stealing candy in aisle 7. Besides, it's hardly a high risk job when compared to a TSA officer, so I don't see the relevance of your argument.

 

But the debate is not regarding tazers, so let's stay on topic, shall we?

 

Your Crayon reference was in essence doing exactly the same, so let's try and act like mature adults and quit whining, shall we?

 

 

 

Why don't you respond to half of the points before jumping mid way through my post?

 

At no point did I say that constantly arming people was a good thing. We're talking about the possibility of a specific set of people using firearms to improve the safety of innocent bystanders..

 

Yes, the blade was a fixed hilt hunting knife made from ABS plastic that was approximately 6" long. Virtually undetectable to metal detectors. Since the passenger concealing the weapon did not declare it, nor declare himself as an LEO, I doubt it was very much for cutting his sandwiches. Especially when it was strapped to his inner thigh.

 

They need to be armed in case the passenger had chosen to attack them whilst they were carrying out their job, especially when weapons, such as knives or potentially firearms could be involved.

 

Ory, according to your facebook profile, you're currently working as a "Loss Prevention Officer" AKA a store security guard. Didn't realize that you encountered many knives whilst stopping your little kiddies from stealing candy in aisle 7. Besides, it's hardly a high risk job when compared to a TSA officer, so I don't see the relevance of your argument.

 

But the debate is not regarding tazers, so let's stay on topic, shall we?

 

Your Crayon reference was in essence doing exactly the same, so let's try and act like mature adults and quit whining, shall we?

 

I respond to things worth responding to, which is why I only responded to partial things...

As for my job...

 

As for the rest, we will continue via PM, which is inbound to you.

I don't see why this need to move to a PM, since it's a public discussion....

 

But it's fine by me.

Fuck that! there are WAY too many issues with firearms as it is, even LEO's misuse them sometimes but that's all part of being an LEO, I've heard some pretty disturbing stories about TSA Agents.. I won't EVER fly anywhere in the U.S.. TSA are the last people i'd ever give a firearm to.. I read an article somewhere there is some sort of Unit consisting of Federal Agents and TSA working together as some Anti Highway Terrorism Unit.. The one Government group I think should be completely disbanded..

 

I heard stories also about TSA Frisk . But i really don't think they are harming anyone. They are making sure no one is Transporting any Items that can Harm or Cause a issue during Transport. You have to understand the way the world is now is completely Sick! People want to disarm the Law enforcement. and Apply all these Gun rules for people that have weapons. But you have to clearly understand it only works for the people that obey the law. for the Criminal there is no Law or Rules.. They should have some TSA officers Armed on scene in case something Goes wrong.... And BTW Being a officer isn;t a easy job! Sad to say but the Laws of America Protect the Criminals more then the innocent. For example! if a person tries to evade a officer and a officer Decides to use a tazer to stop him!! now the guy gets a heart attack and dies. the family sue the department! why? they guy was running and its not like officer have x ray eyes to see what his heart can handle! or  what about this! if someone was gonna Hurt harming your mother or sister and you decide to Attack the person and you end up Breaking the suspect arm! guess what you can get Sued or Charged!.....here is my facts http://overlawyered.com/2006/09/the-burglar-and-the-skylight-another-debunking-that-isnt/

 

People need to stop thinking its the cops cops cops. yea they are some asshole cops out there but think about it! can you really blame them when people keep on Trying to kill them, Run, Say things to make a cop go crazy....... Anyways If you have nothing to Hide then why worry if TSA will get armed... I dont Recommend Every TSA agent but ones that are PEace officer and have Training...... We need to keep the public area more safer! everywhere in the world now its always 1 person carrying over 400 rounds of ammo and just shooting random people! and when the officer get on scene they guy decides to kill himself.. here is some facts

 

 

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/12/lawsuit-of-the-day-kidnapper-sues-hostages-for-breach-of-contract/

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/05/richard-shoop-new-jersey-mall-shooter_n_4217749.html

If they go through extensive training, and do well then I am all for it !

I don't see why this need to move to a PM, since it's a public discussion....

 

But it's fine by me.

It's a POLL not a debate.. & i'm not going to argue in this topic

 

EDIT: What is with all the butt hurt? I stated my opinion, leave it at that.

Edited November 18, 201312 yr by Slimory

tsa doesn't hurt anyone? I beg to differ

This sounds to me like the most uneducated post that I've heard in the past year on these forums. The issue is not with the firearm itself, it's with the people that they are given to. You state in your post that LEO's misuse weapons sometimes, but "that's all part of being an LEO". How on earth does the job description of an LEO include the misuse of weapons?

 

Regardless, provided the TSA personnel in question has had the correct criminal record check and psych evaluation, I see no problem in arming them, provided that it will increase the security in airports and reduce the demand of police officers.

 

To not fly within the US because of stories that you've heard about the TSA is completely ridiculous, so many people pass through the US airports every day without any problems at all. It seems to me as though you've opposed the main post, without any credible evidence or reasoning.

 

You realize that there have been multiple controversies surrounding the TSA from letting prohibited items (knives and guns) through, to sleeping on the job to actually failing to detect explosive devices during covert tests run by DHS; and yet people want to arm them?

 

TSA Officers are not sworn law enforcement officers and as such have no powers of arrest, instead of arming them why don't we either increase Airport Police or as another member wrote consolidate Airport Police and Border Protection into one unified organization. Better yet why not just give airport security to the State Police or Federal Protective Service as the Australians and us Canadians have done.

that's only a tiny bit of the controversy around the tsa they are largely known for groping people in private parts that is the MAIN controversy and why I hate the tsa the war on terror is a fraud anyway

HA HA my evil plan worked. I have split the community into two its only a matter of time before the East and West Declare war on each other. HA HA HA!!!!

 

But on a serious note its nice to be able to have a acutal nice debate on here once with out it turning into "you're mom is so fat she "insert mildly insulting joke here" Jokes

Edited November 18, 201312 yr by Darkangel