CAP leaders working TSA waiver

[Spike]

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS – Civil Air Patrol is urging the Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration to grant CAP members a waiver from new requirements that officials believe would seriously hinder the members' ability to perform the vital missions they carry out daily.

The new requirement, issued Dec. 10 and now scheduled to take effect June 1, would require Security Threat Assessments for all general aviation owners and operators using commercial airports. Aircrew members would also be required to obtain special photo IDs.

In seeking a waiver for Civil Air Patrol, CAP National Commander Maj. Gen. Amy S. Courter has advised TSA that applying the new requirements to the organization would curtail its performance of emergency operations missions for the Air Force and other agencies, which include:

    * Flying more than 70,000 hours in fiscal 2008 in support of Air Force missions;
    * Providing 60-80 percent of scheduled daily flights in support of Air Force North's air defense and defense support to civil authorities; and
    * Carrying out daily flights for search and rescue, disaster response, homeland security and counterdrug missions.

Members performing those missions routinely use commercial airports, Courter said, because those facilities offer advantages that smaller airports and military bases do not.

Individual members' costs for the security screenings and ID cards outlined in the TSA directive would vary by airport but are expected to range from $15 to $100 or more, for each airport where access is needed.

The organization's budget cannot cover that expense, Courter said. Expecting the members to pay for access cards to any commercial airport(s) they may use is "unreasonable," she added, given the hundreds of hours they volunteer each year in service to their communities and the nation.

In addition, she noted, all CAP adult members go through an FBI Criminal Justice Information Services background check in order to become a member. They are able to gain entry to military bases by showing appropriate CAP and photo identification card(s) – a process that could also be used to meet the upcoming TSA security requirement, she said.

CAP officials are continuing to work with federal officials in response to the requirements of the TSA security directive. Members should take no action at this time in regard to the waiver initiative; however, any member wanting to personally apply and pay for a TSA special photo ID may do so, as those applications are now available

I saw no discussion here on this subject. 

What does everyone think?  Is this going to be yet another cost to the yearly dues?

Would a Federal Government CAC work in this case? 

[es_g0d]

The TSA is out of control.  I'm hoping that freedom prevails.

[Smithsonia]

I can hardly wait for TSA to go through our on-board  mountain survival kit... the
flare gun will make them ever so crazy.

[es_g0d]

Until just a few years ago, a firearm was REQUIRED equipment (per state law) here in Alaska.  We ought to bring that back. 

[AlphaSigOU]

If I remember correctly (and somenone correct me if I'm wrong) there was a move to create a CAC-like card as a CAP photo ID a few years ago but Ma Blue had kittens sideways and nixed it. Thus came the current photo ID, which we have to shell out an additional $4.

Unlikely we'll have a CAC-like smart card unless Ma Blue changes her mind. Since entry to any military installation is dependent on the installation commander, entry requirements vary widely; some will accept CAP membership card backed up with other photo ID, others will not let you in unless you are on a current access list and sponsored by AD military. Increased FPCON postures may make it even more difficult to get in, or if you are already in, to get around the base. Even then, the civilian 'gate gumbys' at the main gate may have no earthly clue what CAP is. (Seriously, they probably don't get briefed about it unless an AD SP tells 'em.)

We may have to suffer going through the indignity of having to get Roto-Rootered thoroughly to get special IDs, much like port workers already have to go through. And pay $100+ for the privilege.

[Johnny Yuma]

I personally have absolutely ZERO respect for TSA after what they did to General Joe Foss:

http://www.homeofheroes.com/news/archives/2002_0100_foss.html

[Spike]

^
Terrible. 

[RiverAux]

I personally have absolutely ZERO respect for TSA after what they did to General Joe Foss:

http://www.homeofheroes.com/news/archives/2002_0100_foss.html

Hmm, while TSA had been authorized by Congress almost two months before this incident, it doesn't look like they started recruiting and hiring their own people until almost two months after this happened according to a little internet browsing.  So, you might want to drop the grudge. 

[jimmydeanno]

I don't like TSA either.  I love paying $600.00 to be treated like a prisoner.  The only difference is that in prison I think I'd get searched less.

[Smithsonia]

In WW2 at the height of the darkest days the CAP Courier Service flew right into the major airbases all over the West. We flew 14,000 per month, just in the Courier planes.

We landed on West Coast military fields worried about Japanese attacks. We landed at Boeing Field in Seattle, the Lockheed Plant Van Nuys, and the Douglas Factory Santa Monica, each with anti-aircraft batteries. We landed on Civilian Fields all over the place.

We landed in an individually prescribed manner at each base so that they knew it was CAP. We had the most flight hours of any organized group in the US military. At least 3 pilots left CAP with more flight hours than even the most senior crews in the Pacific or European Theaters.

We flew in without radios... we landed... we taxied to the tower or operations and reported in. Usually, if the weather cost us time, we weren't on schedule either. So we might not be there when we said we would. We carried sidearms. We were trusted. We were needed. There was no TSA. We did a lot of business and SAR work. We'll get it figured out.

[Flying Pig]

^Although TSA can be over bearing, NOBODY get treated like that anymore so its not a relevant argument when everyone keeps going back to WWII to justify things CAP should be able to do.

[heliodoc]

^^^x2

Doing the above things "like during periods of WWII" will surely get a Form 5 would  more than likely get yanked today , wouldn't you agree///

All this reference of what wer (CAP) did in WWII was GREAT then

We are now 2009, a very new world with alot of problems set up for us by DHS and TSA to solve.... CAP is not going to do this one alone, so we best start teaming up with the likes of AOPA and other partners in GA.  I know we have done this already ....more to do

CAP and WWII are over.  This history is and was wonderful....The men and women back then, are our greatest generation

The current CAP....well, with all the risk averse and lawyering up we got going on... well you can figure it out!!!!

[jimmydeanno]

CAP and WWII are over.  This history is and was wonderful....

No kidding, I chuckle every time I read through some of our squadron's historical WWII correspondence, etc and see requests for .50 cal machine guns for guard duty at the local airport.  Or re-read the information about one of our cadets who was shot by a senior member with a handgun while they were on night-watch.

A different time indeed, but one does have to wonder whether or not we even need TSA.  Why are we putting our personal protection into the hands of someone else?  Wouldn't a better solution be to let everyone walk onto the plane armed?  Someone steps out of line and the rest of the passengers deal with the situation. 

Ya, I'll be ok with screening for bombs, but are my flip-flops such a threat that they must be x-rayed while I'm in another room being strip searched because I have a pair of fingernail clippers in my pocket and have been deemed "an enemy of the state" because I happen to have my CAP uniform in my luggage?

But, back to the original topic, this is an obvious area that needs to be addressed, and in all reality shouldn't have ever even become an issue.  It's a requirement that is adding unneeded bureaucracy and expense to an already burdened area of our economy, all in the name of job security.

[JayT]

CAP and WWII are over.  This history is and was wonderful....

A different time indeed, but one does have to wonder whether or not we even need TSA.  Why are we putting our personal protection into the hands of someone else?  Wouldn't a better solution be to let everyone walk onto the plane armed?  Someone steps out of line and the rest of the passengers deal with the situation. 

Ya, I'll be ok with screening for bombs, but are my flip-flops such a threat that they must be x-rayed while I'm in another room being strip searched because I have a pair of fingernail clippers in my pocket and have been deemed "an enemy of the state" because I happen to have my CAP uniform in my luggage?

Yeah, because everyone who has a gun is trained to fight on an airline, and equiped with low velocity ammunition.

Get real.

[Smithsonia]

Since folks are commenting on my WW2 reference, I suppose that I should too. We are trusted - or - we are not. Meaning, we'll get a "work-around" - or we won't. If we don't get a work around... then we will not be considered necessary. We will not be considered trusted. Then we'll know that our day is passing. Then we'll know that we are obsolete, or irrelevant. We'll know if the folks in Washington have any future need of us in their plans. We'll find out soon.

We matter or we don't. We're part of the team - or not. We're not living in the past. We're not judged from the past. However, our purpose, mission, and status ARE informed by our past... Reading into the WW2 reference any more than that... is wishful thinking, or antiquated thinking. Literally our future is being weighed right now. In this they are balancing the possibility that we'll be more of a problem than a solution. We've jumped through smaller hoops than this before (as in WW2). And as I said, we'll find out soon.

I think they'll keep us on the team, just like WW2 and for most of the same reasons.

[jimmydeanno]

Yeah, because everyone who has a gun is trained to fight on an airline, and equiped with low velocity ammunition.

Get real.

Because stripping everyone of everything obviously makes a difference...so much so that hijackers can take over a plane with a box cutter...

I was "getting real." Just let citizens who normally carry anyway to continue to do so. No point in continuing to try and make people fear guns and the people who carry them. No "low velocity" rounds needed, no SWAT team airliner tactics need to be learned. 

How's that quote go?  "A well armed society is a polite society?"

[JayT]

Yeah, because everyone who has a gun is trained to fight on an airline, and equiped with low velocity ammunition.

Get real.

Because stripping everyone of everything obviously makes a difference...so much so that hijackers can take over a plane with a box cutter...

I was "getting real." Just let citizens who normally carry anyway to continue to do so. No point in continuing to try and make people fear guns and the people who carry them. No "low velocity" rounds needed, no SWAT team airliner tactics need to be learned. 

How's that quote go?  "A well armed society is a polite society?"

I'm sure that the familes of the Columbine students, or the V-Tech students, or the parents of the Dunblane students, would agree.

[sparks]

Arm everyone so commercial airports can resemble the wild west. The guys and gals getting snockered at the bar or onboard can take out their anger by popping a few ticket agents, flight attendants or YOU. At least the only danger now is getting punched out or slammed with a lap top.

No, I'm not a fan of TSA either but more guns on planes isn't the answer. Giving everyone a baseball bat when boarding might be interesting (no booze please).

[flyguy06]

The TSA is out of control.  I'm hoping that freedom prevails.

Freedom isnt FREE. It comes with a price. (Not that I am defending TSA) I have no  opinion on the subject

[es_g0d]

Freedom must be fought for; freedom versus security is a continual balance.  TSA has swung too far towards security, and is attempting to limit our freedoms unnecessarily.

And yes, I'm fighting for freedom, in more ways than one.