Questions re. security screenings

Last month I flew MSP-TYO-SIN and returned SIN-TYO-PDX-MSP.

Going, I had to go through baggage x-ray and metal detector in TYO, and
on the return I had to do so in TYO and PDX.

I don't understand why. I had to pass the screening at the start of the
journey, so why did they repeat it at the transfer points? In PDX I even
asked why, and the answer was because I was entering the airport, which
I thought really did not answer the question. However, the screener had
an edge to his answer that said, "Don't cause trouble." so I dropped it.

Still, what is the logic that I am missing?

On 3/9/2008 7:58 PM P T ignored two million years of human evolution to
write:

[...] I had to pass the screening at the start of the
journey, so why did they repeat it at the transfer points? In PDX I even
asked why, and the answer was because I was entering the airport, which
I thought really did not answer the question. However, the screener had
an edge to his answer that said, "Don't cause trouble." so I dropped it.

Still, what is the logic that I am missing?

The logic is "don't cause trouble." I had to do a similar thing not
long ago. I went through security at BRU, cleared immigration and
customs at IAD (which included picking up my bag and carrying them
through), gave my bag back to be screened again, and then went
through IAD security before going on to my connecting domestic flight.
Apparently, security at BRU Just Isn't Good Enough.

It's great for promoting the illusion that the TSA is Doing Something
in the War on Terrah, though, isn't it?
--
dgs

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 20:28:52 -0700, "d.g.s."
wrote:

On 3/9/2008 7:58 PM P T ignored two million years of human evolution to
write:

[...] I had to pass the screening at the start of the
journey, so why did they repeat it at the transfer points? In PDX I even
asked why, and the answer was because I was entering the airport, which
I thought really did not answer the question. However, the screener had
an edge to his answer that said, "Don't cause trouble." so I dropped it.

Still, what is the logic that I am missing?

The logic is "don't cause trouble." I had to do a similar thing not
long ago. I went through security at BRU, cleared immigration and
customs at IAD (which included picking up my bag and carrying them
through), gave my bag back to be screened again, and then went
through IAD security before going on to my connecting domestic flight.
Apparently, security at BRU Just Isn't Good Enough.

It's great for promoting the illusion that the TSA is Doing Something
in the War on Terrah, though, isn't it?

This has been answered before -- it's because you had access to your
checked luggage in order to go through customs, and there are items
permitted in checked luggage but not in carryons (declared guns and
ammunition, to pick the most glaring example), so you're "tainted" and
need to be rescreened before entering the qualified-to-board-secure
area.

I haven't done it myself, but I understand in some airports (ATL?),
even if you're ending your journey there, you have to go through
security just to take the inside-security train to the main terminal
and exit/collect your luggage again. This is basically a function of
the airport's choice of architecture rather than a TSA "invasion".

For all of the insane policies in our lives, the "where you get
screened" part actually makes logical sense given the difference
between checked and carryon luggage.

Josh

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 21:58:26 -0500 (P T) wrote:

:Last month I flew MSP-TYO-SIN and returned SIN-TYO-PDX-MSP.

:Going, I had to go through baggage x-ray and metal detector in TYO, and
:on the return I had to do so in TYO and PDX.

:I don't understand why. I had to pass the screening at the start of the
:journey, so why did they repeat it at the transfer points? In PDX I even
:asked why, and the answer was because I was entering the airport, which
:I thought really did not answer the question. However, the screener had
:an edge to his answer that said, "Don't cause trouble." so I dropped it.

One part of it is PC to appease the Moslems. Obviously someone coming from the
US and Israel has passed a pretty good security check and there should be no
need to further screen, while someone coming from Syria or Egypt should be
treated as not being screened. The non-US airports take the easy way of
insisting on rescreening all passengers.

The reason for the rescreening in PDX was that you had to claim your baggage
and thus you had access to any baggage coming from any flight. Obviously there
is a need for rescreening.

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

Josh schrieb:
On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 20:28:52 -0700, "d.g.s."
wrote:

On 3/9/2008 7:58 PM P T ignored two million years of human evolution to
write:

[...] I had to pass the screening at the start of the
journey, so why did they repeat it at the transfer points? In PDX I even
asked why, and the answer was because I was entering the airport, which
I thought really did not answer the question. However, the screener had
an edge to his answer that said, "Don't cause trouble." so I dropped it.

Still, what is the logic that I am missing?
The logic is "don't cause trouble." I had to do a similar thing not
long ago. I went through security at BRU, cleared immigration and
customs at IAD (which included picking up my bag and carrying them
through), gave my bag back to be screened again, and then went
through IAD security before going on to my connecting domestic flight.
Apparently, security at BRU Just Isn't Good Enough.

It's great for promoting the illusion that the TSA is Doing Something
in the War on Terrah, though, isn't it?

This has been answered before -- it's because you had access to your
checked luggage in order to go through customs, and there are items
permitted in checked luggage but not in carryons (declared guns and
ammunition, to pick the most glaring example), so you're "tainted" and
need to be rescreened before entering the qualified-to-board-secure
area.

It's happened to me in Europe (Madrid), where there is no access to
checked luggage on transit.

I haven't done it myself, but I understand in some airports (ATL?),
even if you're ending your journey there, you have to go through
security just to take the inside-security train to the main terminal
and exit/collect your luggage again. This is basically a function of
the airport's choice of architecture rather than a TSA "invasion".

For all of the insane policies in our lives, the "where you get
screened" part actually makes logical sense given the difference
between checked and carryon luggage.

Josh

Because each country is responsible for the security of the people and
flights that pass through their territory and thus are not in a position
to blindingly trust and assume the previous country did their jobs.

Those the recognize this fact step up screening security.

Screenings are noticably tighter all over Asia lately.

P T wrote:
Last month I flew MSP-TYO-SIN and returned SIN-TYO-PDX-MSP.

Going, I had to go through baggage x-ray and metal detector in TYO, and
on the return I had to do so in TYO and PDX.

I don't understand why. I had to pass the screening at the start of the
journey, so why did they repeat it at the transfer points? In PDX I even
asked why, and the answer was because I was entering the airport, which
I thought really did not answer the question. However, the screener had
an edge to his answer that said, "Don't cause trouble." so I dropped it.

Still, what is the logic that I am missing?

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 21:58:26 -0500, (P T) wrote:

Last month I flew MSP-TYO-SIN and returned SIN-TYO-PDX-MSP.

Going, I had to go through baggage x-ray and metal detector in TYO, and
on the return I had to do so in TYO and PDX.

I don't understand why. I had to pass the screening at the start of the
journey, so why did they repeat it at the transfer points? In PDX I even
asked why, and the answer was because I was entering the airport, which
I thought really did not answer the question. However, the screener had
an edge to his answer that said, "Don't cause trouble." so I dropped it.

Still, what is the logic that I am missing?



Kindly give a "cats and coffee" warning when you intend to use the
word "logic" in a question regarding airport security.

Jim P.