[Archive Home][Date Prev][Date Next][Index]

         

"While airport passes the buck, guns take flight"


 
Title:

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Commentary
While airport passes the buck, guns take flight
Take comfort in statistical probability. That is your best security.
By Mike Thomas
The Orlando (FL) Sentinel


Mike Thomas

Despite all that you've been reading about security lapses at Orlando International Airport, rest assured that it still is safer to fly to Ohio than to drive a Yugo to Ohio.

If you calculate the odds that terrorists are going to strike on any given day versus about 30,000 airline flights every day, the chances of a bomb winding up in your overhead compartment are pretty remote.

Unfortunately, so are the odds that security would prevent it from getting there. Take comfort in statistical probability. That is your best security.

Last week we learned airport employees were charged with using airliners to smuggle guns to Puerto Rico.

Actually, we learned that in 2004. What we learned last week was that nobody has done anything about it.

And now we have airport authorities and the Transportation Security Administration arguing over whose responsibility it was to guard unmanned employee entrance doors behind baggage-claim carousels.

"There's no requirement for us to staff the doors," OIA spokeswoman Carolyn Fennell said. "We were not asked to take that responsibility."

If there is a serious security breach right in front of your face, is the proper response to shrug your shoulders and say, "Not my job, man"?

The TSA, on the other hand, claimed it is only a "regulatory agency" and that the doors are the airport's responsibility.

Not my job, man.

This is like two lifeguards arguing over whose section of beach that guy drowning out there is in.

The alleged smugglers walked through one of those doors with the duffel bag filled with 14 guns.

Even more amazing is that these employee entrances were flagged as a security problem back in 2004, when five current and former workers were caught smuggling guns and drugs on planes. One claimed he did it regularly.

After that incident, the TSA and the airport announced they would begin screening workers. At some point, that stopped.

If you want to know why or when, don't ask Fennell. While she has been with OIA for more than 20 years, she told a reporter this week that she doesn't remember the arrests or increased security.

I'll refresh her memory with these two headlines from back then:

OIA runway workers face security screen.

OIA bribes reveal airport vulnerabilities.

OIA means Orlando International Airport.

Here is a line from the second story about how the men bypassed security: "It was so easy that a baggage handler earning $240 a week delivered two duffel bags in two days to OIA departure gates without their being checked."

How do you forget that?

Or this quote from Robert Monetti, past president of Victims of Pan Am 103, talking about security breaches: "The terrorists are not stupid people. They notice what's been fixed and what hasn't."

Evidently that is more than we can expect from the people who are supposed to stop the terrorists.

Of course, in defense of the airport and TSA, it's not like checking the workers would have mattered anyway.

Last year, more than half the TSA screeners at the Orlando airport failed a test that measured how well they could detect explosives, guns and other weapons on the scanner.

We face an increasingly sophisticated and agile enemy.

And we are defended by plodding bureaucracies that seem to be more concerned with passing the buck and covering their rear ends than protecting us.


Current CAA news channel:


Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. If you have any queries regarding this issue, please Email us at stepheni@cwnet.com