CHO Security…More Than Meets The Eye?

The airport wants us to know that they’re running a secure facility, presumably to reassure us that they’d never let terrorists through their metal detectors or hire anybody with evil intentions. Rey Barry noticed that, but found that the image just doesn’t fit with the reality. Keep reading for Rey’s letter on the topic, which originally appeared on George Loper’s website.

Have you been seeing the TV ads for the Charl-Alb Airport stressing stressing stressing “security?” The Help Wanted ads in the Daily Progress are a bit more instructive than those TV ads. The ad below appeared Wednesday the 14th:

“Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport – Full time Airport Community Service Officer. Fulltime, assigned to 1 of 3 shifts: 6 am-2 pm, 2 pm-10 pm, 10 pm-6 am with two permanent days off. Starting pay range $8.50/hour.

“Performs routine security patrols of airport to protect property & equipment from unauthorized use or theft. Controls movement of personnel and vehicles within the facility & enforces security access control system to identify and control all employees, visitors, & vehicles.

“Counts overnight vehicles in the parking lots & prepares shift checklists. Assists Public Safety Officers with airport operations. May assist with snow removal.

“Requirements include good powers of memory & observation, ability to operate motor vehicles, good physical condition & ability to act calmly & quickly in emergencies & other critical situations,

“High school education or GED preferred. Successful applicant must supply copy of driving record prior to hire.”

That is our vaunted airport security. $8.50 an hour entry-level employees. It matters not at all if the head of the security department is an over-qualified James Bond at $150,000 a year, backed up by $3 million in state-of-the-art hardware. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link and our airport chain of security relies on unskilled, untrained, entry-level help. So do all other US airports. Ads like that appear all over the country.

Wednesday morning the vile Sen. Phil Gramm was on CNBC defending this as entirely adequate for the nation’s airport security. He raised hell about people wanting the government to take over security functions at airports. He sank to a level of rabble ignorance seldom heard beyond Rush Limbaugh, calling federalizing airport security a Democrat plot to create big government.

Nice to be reminded who the enemies are.

5 thoughts on “CHO Security…More Than Meets The Eye?”

  1. The weakest link of the entire air system is the small airports. If you can slip past the security at CHO, you can roam the country without passing a security checkpoint again. Some airports have separated arrival and departure gates with security, but many have not. Most simply separate international and domestic with a checkpoint.

    I can’t say anything good about the passenger and baggage security I saw at CHO as of a year ago. I took a stun gun and a 4″ knife in carry-on without any questions. I suppose at the time both items were legal, but I wasn’t questioned further, which should be common sense. But I can say that the rest of their security is better. If you’re getting anywhere near the ramp or terminal area and you’re not supposed to be there, they’ll put a stop to it quickly.

    Security is a tradeoff between making life impossible and having no protection at all. Having too much security can be just as bad as having none at all. Terrorists could stab pilots with a rolled up newspaper or a plastic fork. Total safety is not possible. Just look at what security is needed for air transport of prisoners. Should we strap everyone down to their seats and put several big guys with guns on every flight?

    CHO’s risk is lower than other airports, simply because of the scale. We have small aircraft, with few passengers. If terrorists did fly at CHO, they’d probably just be trying to get somewhere else.

  2. By all means. Let’s pay them $85 an hour instead. Then I am sure we will have “perfect” human beings doing the job.

  3. “Nice to be reminded who the enemies are.”

    Actually I am suprised at such a knee-jerk liberal response from Waldo. The enemy are the terrorist. Yet you would be the first to defend those who might say “America they had it coming”. Not the essence of their words but their right to express them. Charlottesville seems like a haven for all creeds, race, sex prefence, and nationality. except if you believe the “the goverment that governs least govern’s best”

    Since you screed asumes that federalizing gate guards is such a no-brainer, please enlight me why it would be beter that the bill we got. The no. 1 reason republicans objected was the creation of a new group of people who can’t be fired. Ask some one at UVA how hard it is to fire someone who is absolute terrible from a state job. I have friends, in the federal government, that complain bitterly about all they can do with bad employees is move them- because it takes forever to fire someone.

    That is what so many conservative mean when the curse “big government”. Programs that never die, employees with lifetime job security, and not even a glance at the bottom line. Goverment is not bad but many of these policies are.

    And if liberals spent more time explaining why Limbaugh is wrong then just chanting the mantra “Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat idiot” I might even serious consider their tirades.

  4. Actually I am suprised at such a knee-jerk liberal response from Waldo.

    That’s because I didn’t write it. :)

    In the intro: “Keep reading for Rey’s letter on the topic, which originally appeared on George Loper’s website.”

    It’s by Rey Barry, not I. But without reading closely, it is unclear, I’ll admit.

  5. So you didn’t write it but put it on you site. You must have found the letter reflects some of your thoughts. You have no reponse other than “hey, I didn’t write that!”. It is an opinion piece that has been challenged. So are you responding or absconding?

Comments are closed.