We live in a time when it is not in vogue to criticize the president or his administration, for they are grappling with the greatest national emergency since World War II and seemingly rising to the occasion like true patriots. For perennial jokesters like Jay Leno and David Letterman, it’s hands off making fun of the president. I even found myself admonishing a friend who sent me an unflattering and tasteless photo of George W. Bush via e-mail. I was never a big fan of this president, but he’s the man in the hot seat, he’s calling the shots, and we have to support him. There hasn’t been this much bi-partisan backing in congress since FDR was in office.

All that being said, I’m not convinced that the best courses of action are being taken in regards to airline security. Of all times, in light of the atrocities of Sept.11, all measures should be maximized, regardless of cost or inconvenience. We have been rudely placed on notice by the world’s fanatics. We are under siege. Why hold back?

First, the Airline Pilots Association have repeatedly lobbied to be armed in the cockpit, and I’m hard-pressed to understand the administration’s opposition. After all, if a hijacker is able to make it into the pilot’s domain, the leader on that flight would, at the least, have his own mode of protection, which spells protection for everyone on board. To disregard the fervent recommendations of pilots in matters of in-air security is like ignoring experienced cops in designing police procedures.

Second, airport screening systems should be removed from the private sector and placed in the hands of federal law enforcement, where personnel would be highly trained, well paid and directly answerable to the airlines and the federal agency who hires them. This is not the posture of the administration. Rather, they wish to see screeners remain as private security personnel but supervised by the federal government. That’s like placing a Band-aid over a shotgun wound.

Private security screeners are notoriously underpaid, undertrained and incompetent. The turnovers are better than 100 percent in some places. Stricter supervision and accountability might help, but not much.

I had the good fortune of working four years in the management side of a major security company after my 30 years in law enforcement. I have seen, first hand, that profit is the driving force behind managing security contracts. When clients are forced to assign contracts to the lowest bidders, despite rigid specifications, they often get what they pay for. The issue of bids and profit must be eliminated from this most crucial entity.

Third, one of the frustrating dilemmas during my experience as a security manager was hiring foreigners whose background was virtually impossible to check. When I attempted to implement stricter screening mechanisms of Haitians and Jamaicans, I was accused of being racist and forced to retract. Today, airlines are faced with the same dilemmas, accepting applications for security jobs submitted by people of foreign lands;:Asians, Middle easterners, islanders, Africans, and more, and while they go through superficial background checks, there is really no way to infiltrate the records of another country to weed out the truth about an applicant’s history. Unless someone is an American citizen, and their backgrounds fully checked out, they should not be in the critical position of protecting Americans.

Fourth, why are the baggage handlers being ignored? Here are thousands of employees, some of questionable background, who have ready access to the belly of every airplane in America. Top network magazine shows, with hidden cameras, have uncovered horrendous conduct by these employees. Many with criminal records have been exposed. Yet, the airports knee jerk, fire the accused, and go on with the same hiring practices. If there is still vulnerability in airline security, it exists behind the scenes. And it is real.

Fifth, boarding armed sky marshals on planes is a good idea. But we can go a step further. Federal law enforcement agents, and local police officers all over this nation fly airplanes regularly. In the 1960s, when cops transported prisoners across the country on extradition assignments, they merely notified the cockpit, presented a myriad of documentation and boarded wearing a firearm.

Anyone who has ever read my writings, knows I am a strong advocate of gun control. I simply believe that all guns should be accountable via registration and licensing. But I see no reason to exclude armed FBI, DEA and other select law enforcement personnel from being armed on flights. It would sure put the hijackers on notice.

Sixth, as does El-Al Airlines in Israel, let’s screen all passengers for criminal history and Visa checks. After all, they are the safest airline in the world. They’ve invented this wheel, why reinvent it?

Seventh, it’s time to seriously revamp our immigration laws and policies. This is no longer the end of the 19th century. These are new and more dangerous times, and we must keep up with them. Then again, that’s another story.

Now, if all this was in place, wouldn’t you be ready to start flying again? I would.

(Marshall Frank is a retired Miami-Dade police officer and author who has written two crime novels. He lives in Maggie Valley.)

 

Back to Top
The Smoky Mountain News