We have the selectee list, the no-fly list, and now Dvorak Uncensored reports we have the uncooperative serf list:
Airline passengers who get frustrated and kick a wall, throw a suitcase or make a pithy comment to a screener could find themselves in a little-known Homeland Security database.
The Transportation Security Administration says it is keeping records of people who make its screeners feel threatened as part of an effort to prevent workplace violence.
Now I can understand wanting to deal with customers kicking walls and throwing suitcases (for instance removing them from the airport) but making comments? Seriously? Are the poor wittle TSA agents getting hurt feewings? On a more serious note this list could be used as a sort of “revenge” list:
Privacy advocates fear the database could feed government watch lists and subject innocent people to extra airport screening.
Once again I’ll state that customers who are acting outwardly violent by damaging equipment should be removed from the airport like the tantrum throwing child they are. They still shouldn’t be put on a list that opens them up to additional screening as a form of revenge by untouchable government agents. This goes double for people making rude remarks. But here’s the funniest part:
The database was created in late 2007 as the TSA launched a program to prevent the nation’s 50,000 airport screeners from being attacked or threatened, agency spokeswoman Kristin Lee said. At the time, TSA officials voiced concern about passengers disrespecting screeners, and they began issuing new uniforms with police-style badges pinned to shirts.
Lee said attacks and threats against screeners are “rare” and the database has records from about 240 incidents. Most are screeners in conflict with other screeners. About 30 incidents involve people such as passengers or airport workers attacking or threatening screeners, Lee said.
I don’t know why they put the word rare in quotation marks. Considering the number of people who fly every year having only 30 passenger names in it since 2007 means it’s pretty fucking rare. I do find it funny how 210 of the recorded incidents involved screeners in conflict with their colleague. It shows what happens when you give two morons a little bit of authority, they can’t use it responsibly.