Friday, January 27, 2012

TSA Week in Review: Leave Your Throwing Stars at Home, Grasshopper


Knives & throwing stars. Concealed Razorblades: Two razorblades were found concealed in the frame of a carry-on bag at Sacramento (SMF)

Leave Them at Home: A throwing star was found in a carry-on bag at Baltimore (BWI) and another found in a passenger’s bag traveling out of Lexington (LEX). Either leave these at home or pack them in your checked baggage, but be sure to check state laws before packing them, Grasshopper.

$22,373: A passenger at Jackson (JAX) turned in an abandoned bag to a TSA supervisor. The bag made its way back to its owner along with the $22,373.00 that was inside it!

West Side Story?: Four switchblades were found in carry-on baggage. One at Baltimore (BWI), two at Los Angeles (LAX) and one at LaGuardia (LGA). I wonder if they were snapping their fingers?

“Thwak – Thwak”: <-- Throwing knife sound effects: Two throwing knives were found in a carry-on bag at Denver (DEN). Throwing knives are usually in sets of three, so that leaves me wondering what the third knife is stuck in? Throwing knives were also found this week at Newark (EWR) and Lexington (LEX).

Pretzels?: A knife was found  at Burlington (BTV) concealed in a bag of… pretzels? Some cereals occasionally have a  free toy inside. Do pretzels now come with knives?

Miscellaneous Prohibited Items: In addition to all of the other prohibited items we find weekly, our officers also found stun guns, brass knuckles, knives, knives, and more knives, firearm components, ammunition, and expandable batons.
8 loaded guns and ammunition.
Firearms: Our officers found 18 loaded firearms and 2 unloaded firearms in carry-on baggage since I posted last Friday. Here’s a rundown of the 20 firearms our officers kept off of airplanes this week: 

1/20: AMA – Loaded .44 – ATL – Loaded .22 – FLL – Loaded .380
1/21: HRL – Loaded .38 – DAL – Loaded .45
1/22: SFB – Loaded .380 w/ round chambered – LEX – Loaded .38
1/23: TUL – Loaded .22 – ABQ – Unloaded .22 – BIL – Loaded .380 w/ round chambered – ATL – Unloaded .45 Black Powder Derringer – SLC – Loaded .380
1/24: MEM – Loaded .380 w/ round chambered – FLL – Loaded .380 – COS – Loaded .357
1/25: PDX – Loaded .25 – DFW – Loaded .45
1/26: BHM – Loaded .380 w/ round chambered – PIT – Loaded 9mm – GNV – Loaded 9mm – PIE – Loaded 9mm

You can travel with your firearms in checked baggage, but they must first be declared to the airline.
You can go here for more details on how to properly travel with your firearms. We also look for explosives and bomb components as well, but thankfully those are extremely rare and we're happy to keep it that way.

Unfortunately these sorts of occurrences are all too frequent which is why we talk about these finds. Sure, it’s great to share the things that our officers are finding, but at the same time, each time we find a dangerous item, the throughput is slowed down and a passenger that likely had no ill intent ends up with a citation or in some cases is even arrested. This is a friendly reminder to please leave these items at home. Just because we find a prohibited item on an individual does not mean they had bad intentions, that's for the law enforcement officer to decide. In many cases, people simply forgot they had these items in their bag. That’s why it’s important to double check your luggage before you get to the airport.


Including checkpoint and checked baggage screening, TSA has
20 layers of security both visible and invisible to the public. Each one of these layers alone is capable of stopping a terrorist attack. In combination their security value is multiplied, creating a much stronger, formidable system. A terrorist who has to overcome multiple security layers in order to carry out an attack is more likely to be pre-empted, deterred, or to fail during the attempt.  

Blogger Bob Burns
 
TSA Blog Team
If you’d like to comment on an unrelated topic you can do so in our Off Topic Comments post. You can also view our blog post archives or search our blog to find a related topic to comment in. If you have a travel related issue or question that needs an immediate answer, you can contact a Customer Support Manager at the airport you traveled, or will be traveling through by using Talk to TSA.

69 comments:

Anonymous said...

"A passenger at Jackson (JAX) turned in an abandoned bag to a TSA supervisor. The bag made its way back to its owner along with the $22,373.00 that was inside it!"

Was the passenger detained and interrogated because he/she was carrying more than $10,000?

Jim Huggins said...

Somehow, you forgot to mention, TSA's detention of a woman whose only crime was bringing an insulin pump through security, which TSA failed to clear properly the first time.

GSOLTSO said...

Your link seems to be jinxed out there Jim, it keeps giving me a dead link, although I think it is from the LA Times.

West
TSA Blog Team

RB said...

Here it is in long form.

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2012/01/tsa_insulin_pump_gun_lax.php

------------------
The first comment to the story tells us what really happened without the normal lies from TSA.
======================

"I know this woman. She called me once she reached her destination to tell me the story of her day.
Normally she does remove her pump, but things were moving so quickly that she didn't have a chance. With the first TSA agent she told him she was diabetic and was wearing an insulin pump prior to entering the body scanner. After the scanning she was told to go over to another TSA agent (a woman). Again, with this agent she informed her that she was wearing a pump and pulled it out to show the agent. Yes, let me say this again. The pump was taken out from under her clothing and shown to the TSA agent!! The agent then turned to the body scanning agent and asked if she was ok. He said yes. The woman TSA agent then told the woman she was ok to go. The woman then asked if it was ok to go---making sure that she understood correctly that she could go. And, again, the TSA agent said yes you can go. OK can someone please tell me what more a person must do to really know if it's ok to go. Isn't twice enough!!!!"

"She showed them the device along with the doctors note (Oh, the woman had informed the original TSA agents that she had a doctors note. I'm not sure whether the agents asked to see it---if they didn't then isn't that their screw up)."

"One more thing, the police told her that the TSA had informed them that the woman was trying to get a bomb on the plane."

Anonymous said...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/01/insulin-pump-lax-airport-security.html

This is the second serious security breach in the past week. Two incidents where travelers left the checkpoint and were then hunted down, in the first incident (at DFW) over an hour later. During that interval, assuming the passengers did have nefarious intent, they could have hidden their contraband in the terminal, to be retrieved after being cleared.

Bob and West, your layers of security FAILED in both cases. If these passengers had had evil intent, they would have succeeded in evading the checkpoint.

So when will we see mention of these breaches on the TSA blog? Doesn't the traveling public have a right to know about TSA failures as much we you crow about its successes, so that we can judge for ourselves whether we're getting our taxpayer money's worth?

[Screenshot captured. Post falls within terms of use.]

Anonymous said...

"Was the passenger detained and interrogated because he/she was carrying more than $10,000?"

If so, can you explain why? Carrying more than $10000 is not a crime and in no way impacts aircraft security.

Anonymous said...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/01/insulin-pump-lax-airport-security.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lanowblog+%28L.A.+Now%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

There you go, West.

Anonymous said...

I find it interesting that insulin pumps are not listed in your "TSA Week in Review." After all, a diabetic woman was detained yesterday (and LAX shut down) for having one--TSA employees claim it looked like a gun!

*News reports also indicate this woman was informed that insulin pumps are not allowed on flights--essentially saying she must risk death to fly.

I know...I know...TSA agents will get more training. How much training does a person need to tell an insulin pump from a gun?

Anonymous said...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/01/insulin-pump-lax-airport-security.html

Jim Huggins said...

Try this link for the story about the insulin pump at LAX.

Anonymous said...

And if those unloaded firearms had no ammo with them at all, not even in the carry bags, then exactly how dangerous were they? Bop someone on the head maybe? I can do that with my computer too, and probably do just as much or even more physical damage to a person.

Someone must be building a nice gun collection.

Now if you could only catch terrorists. I can guarantee that the people who were carrying these weapons had no intention of doing anything with them, where as a real terrorist WILL find a way around you.

SSSS for some reason said...

I don't think the amount of 'prohibited items' being carried onto an aircraft is on the rise so I really have to wonder why airplanes haven't been raining out of the sky? I mean, all this firepower attempting to get through security and there hasn't been a hijacking attempt on a US Flight since September 11, 2001?

Anonymous said...

@first comment. Why do you have to be detained and interrogated for carrying more than $10K? Was the passenger flying outside of the US? You can fly all around the US and not declare your 10K plus currency. You only need to declare if you are traveling internationally. Just Google "FinCEN 105" to find more information.

You know, some easily influenced person will read your comment take it to heart and detain some unfortunate person for no valid reason because of your incomplete information.

GSOLTSO said...

A couple of folks have mentioned the $10k or large amounts of currency, the information for traveling with large amounts of currency can be found here:

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1847.shtm

The regulations on reporting for transporting over $10k out of the U.S. are listed here:

http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/newsroom/publications/travel/currency_rpt_flyer/currency_reporting.ctt/currency_reporting.pdf


P.S. Thanks to all of those that submitted the fixes on that link from earlier!

West
TSA Blog Team

RB said...

GSOLTSO said...
A couple of folks have mentioned the $10k or large amounts of currency, the information for traveling with large amounts of currency can be found here:

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1847.shtm

The regulations on reporting for transporting over $10k out of the U.S. are listed here:

http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/newsroom/publications/travel/currency_rpt_flyer/currency_reporting.ctt/currency_reporting.pdf


P.S. Thanks to all of those that submitted the fixes on that link from earlier!

West
TSA Blog Team

January 29, 2012 4:51 AM
......................
Are you claiming that TSA doesn't have a Management Directive directing TSA employees to investigate large sums of money?

Anonymous said...

Have you found any actual threats to airplane safety? No.

Anonymous said...

And as always, not one of these people was a threat to their or any other flight, as proven by the fact that no one was arrested for terrorism. Why do you always forget to tell the truth on these silly little catalogs of forgetful people who didn't check their bags, and why have you started devoting a weekly post to routine interceptions of objects carried by forgetful people?

Anonymous said...

Bob,

Thanks for censoring my post regarding who is actually trying to bring these objects through the checkpoint.

By censoring my post, you confirmed the information in it was accurate.

Anonymous said...

I love how so many of you guys declare that none of the people who had guns or other prohibited items were terrorists so everything is fine.

Do any of you actually think that it'd be perfectly acceptable for anyone to bring a gun on board an aircraft and have a confined space filled with potential hostages with no avenue of escape?

Preventing a terrorist act on an aircraft is TSA's job number one, but that doesn't mean if someone wants to just shoot up a bunch of defenseless people thats fine, just as long as they don't blow the airplane up or aren't associated with AQ or any other Islamic terrorist group.

TSA is there to try and keep air travel safe. That means preventing the guy who sympathizes with AQ from blowing up an airplane and keeping that guy who's snapped and want's to shoot a bunch of holes in people because his wife left him/the voices told him to/the world isn't fair to him or whatever reason crazy people do things like that.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous - "And as always, not one of these people was a threat to their or any other flight, as proven by the fact that no one was arrested for terrorism."

-----

Airline screening isn't just to find terrorists. The TSA has so many horrible policies, but removing sharp knives and loaded guns from the passenger cabin really isn't one of those bad policies.

I don't want to contemplate if someone carrying a loaded gun is forgetful, a criminal, or a terrorist. I just don't want to sit next to someone with a weapon. Guns, knives, throwing stars, grenades - all things not needed in the passenger cabin.

Even an unloaded gun is a bad idea. Since someone else might sneak on ammo.

Anonymous said...

Wow... are you that narrow minded to think that maybe the people who attempted to carry on a weapon that were discovered by TSA might have intentions to use them?

Anonymous said...

Wow... are you that narrow minded to think that maybe the people who attempted to carry on a weapon that were discovered by TSA might have intentions to use them?

-----------------------------------

Why would the TSA want to use them?

Anonymous said...

"The TSA has so many horrible policies, but removing sharp knives and loaded guns from the passenger cabin really isn't one of those bad policies."

That is true, but TSA's newfound decision in hyping routine detection of stuff no one was planning to do any harm with is not about security, it is about trying to convince people that there are dozens of would-be terror plots being stopped each and every week. It's dishonest fear mongering at its worst.

Anonymous said...

What is the purpose of these postings? The TSA found some guns and knives at the checkpoint, so what? That's the bare minimum requirement of your jobs. I want to know how many of these were caught with the traditional metal detector/x-ray machine versus the new AIT scanners.

I'm also curious as to how people are able to leave the checkpoint without having completed the screening, such as the woman in Dallas who boarded the plane with the gun and the woman in LA whose insulin pump caused some problems.

Speaking of insulin pumps, one of the manufacturers (Animas) says not to go through the either of the scanners with the pump. That is bad for me because I have to hope to get sent through the metal detector or get an invasive patdown because I have to opt out for medical reasons.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"TSA is there to try and keep air travel safe. That means preventing the guy who sympathizes with AQ from blowing up an airplane and keeping that guy who's snapped and want's to shoot a bunch of holes in people because his wife left him/the voices told him to/the world isn't fair to him or whatever reason crazy people do things like that."

And what exactly is preventing this crazy person from shooting holes in the people waiting in the TSA security line? Please explain how protecting just the airplane make us any safer from random violence. It's like wearing your car's seat belt for a few hours once a year and expecting it to make a difference.

Anonymous said...

That is true, but TSA's newfound decision in hyping routine detection of stuff no one was planning to do any harm with is not about security, it is about trying to convince people that there are dozens of would-be terror plots being stopped each and every week. It's dishonest fear mongering at its worst.
------------------------------------

It's not fear mongering, it's showing that still after all these years people are still bringing this kind of stuff and highlighting the fact that as unfortunate as it may be, everyone has to be searched regardless of their age/economic status/race/ethnicity/disability or whatever factor.

Time and time again people bring in guns/grenades/knives or whatever. Most of the time it's unintentional, sometimes it isn't. Sometimes its an elderly person, sometimes its a person confined to a wheelchair and sometimes its a young fit person. Point is, lots of folks out there question why we check old folks, disabled folks or good ole blue blooded Americans at all and not just look for the terrorists and the fact is we can't.

TSA is working at making it better with the Trusted Traveler program and whatnot but it takes time and not everyone is eligible.

We can't rely on profiling alone because clearly many of the things displayed in this blog post show would have gotten on-board and TSA just isn't going to find that acceptable.

Anonymous said...

"Time and time again people bring in guns/grenades/knives or whatever. Most of the time it's unintentional, sometimes it isn't."

And yet, not one single referral for arrest as a suspected terrorist! None of these people meant to harm anyone. Should they have been able to bring a gun on board? No. But that doesn't mean the find should be hyped as if TSA had stopped a terrorist mastermind.


"We can't rely on profiling alone"

We shouldn't rely on profiling, full stop, since it doesn't work.

"because clearly many of the things displayed in this blog post show would have gotten on-board"

Well, no, they wouldn't have. They're big metal objects, easily detectible with WTMDs and X-raying of carryons. TSA has yet to find anything to justify its body scanners, which are expensive and dangerous and force thousands of Americans to undergo invasive searches every single time they fly.

RB said...

Anonymous said...

We can't rely on profiling alone because clearly many of the things displayed in this blog post show would have gotten on-board and TSA just isn't going to find that acceptable.

January 30, 2012 12:02 PM
................
Profiling is exactly what TSA is doing when special groups of people are not screened exactly as everyone else or screened at all. Those groups would include airline crew and workers, airport staff, vendors and of course TSA.

Profiling either works or doesn't and it seems it has a whole lot more going for it than the TSA VODOO Mind Readers which has no basis in science.

Anonymous said...

And what exactly is preventing this crazy person from shooting holes in the people waiting in the TSA security line? Please explain how protecting just the airplane make us any safer from random violence. It's like wearing your car's seat belt for a few hours once a year and expecting it to make a difference.
-------------------------------------

It doesn't make anyone safe from random violence... It is about keeping people safe on the airplane... It's TSA, thats our job.

As a TSO I'm there to help keep bad things from happening on an airplane, not to keep you from being the victim of random violence off of the airplane. Just like when I was in the Navy, I was helping to fight the badguys, not keep you from being the victim of random violence at home.

But why even explain it, I doubt you would ever accept any answer given.

Anonymous said...

"It's not fear mongering, it's showing that still after all these years people are still bringing this kind of stuff and highlighting the fact that as unfortunate as it may be, everyone has to be searched regardless of their age/economic status/race/ethnicity/disability or whatever factor."

Demonstrably false. The "finds" that TSA hypes on the web site do not represent a threat to aviation security. Are you truly concerned that someone brings a "dagger" bush through security? If so, how do you ever expose yourself to a grocery store, restaurant or movie theater?

And please don't trot out the chestnut that those places can't be made into a bomb a la 9/11. Anyone who believes control of an aircraft can be gained with such rudimentary weapons has removed him/herself from a realistic discussion of today's threat.

Anonymous said...

"I love how so many of you guys declare that none of the people who had guns or other prohibited items were terrorists so everything is fine."

OK, based on your assertion that some/most/all are terrorists, now many have been prosecuted for terrorism? How does an airplane differ from a movie theater? In the time that a criminal would enter even a high-capacity clip, very few people would be able to escape.

Anonymous said...

"Even an unloaded gun is a bad idea. Since someone else might sneak on ammo."

Then why do we allow Federal Air Marshals to be armed?

Anonymous said...

"Time and time again people bring in guns/grenades/knives or whatever. "

To my knowledge, no one has ever attempted to bring a grenade through security. Do you have information to the contrary? Please don't cite the inert (read: paperweight) grenades that have occasionally been detected. They are no more grenades than gun-shaped jewelry is a weapon.

Anonymous said...

You guys are insane. Just because someone isn't charged with terrorism for attempting to bring a loaded gun on to an airplane doesn't mean TSA is failing.

What is it about keeping people who are flying safe from your Jihadist wanting to kill a bunch of infidels and keeping people who are flying safe from your whacko looking to kill a bunch of people for headlines that you can not connect as being the same goal?

Now I did say "we cant rely on profiling alone"... I mistyped. I added "alone" in error. What I meant to do was point out that we can't rely on profiling (and in that I mean singling out "middle-eastern looking" people) as some here would like to see happen. I was trying show that profiling doesn't work for what we're doing.

But who cares, with this crowd it'll never be justifiable. Nothing will ever be good enough, unless it was nothing at all.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"It doesn't make anyone safe from random violence... It is about keeping people safe on the airplane... It's TSA, thats our job."

I know that's your job. I just don't believe that the tiny benefit justifies the huge cost.

Anonymous said...

"I just don't want to sit next to someone with a weapon. Guns, knives, throwing stars, grenades - all things not needed in the passenger cabin. "

Me neither! But I'd like to extend this to public restrooms. I don't want to be in a stall next to fellow who might have throwing stars! Please let's guard those.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote: As a TSO I'm there to help keep bad things from happening on an airplane

No. Theoretically, as a TSA employee you're there to try to keep bad things (i.e., prohibited items, like knives, swords, guns, Molotov cocktails, nail files, marijuana, quantities of cash, and cupcakes) from getting on the airplane.

As your compadres have repeatedly stated, it's not the TSA's job to find terrorists. And that's probably a good thing, given how many TWIC cards the TSA has issued to illegal aliens.

Anonymous said...

Oh, come one voting public! Is NOT that bad! You are taking EVERYTHING to the extreme. Can you see the TSA is just doing their job? They are our last line of defense (against insulin pumps and 90 year-old grannies).

Don't you see that they even joke when they do their weekly inventory report of stuff all the people try to get into a plane?

It is your fault. You wanted security? This is the best security votes can get you. You didn't vove for the TSA? Then fix it in November! For the time being, go to the table and assume the position!

Scott G. Lewis said...

People get really hung up on wondering how many people who got caught with guns were "terrorists". Who cares? They aren't tasked solely with stopping terrorist plots. Loaded weapons have never been allowed on planes. If someone gets shot, on a plane (or in a restaurant, movie theater, or anywhere else), and it turns out it wasn't a terrorist who pulled the trigger, we don't turn and say "well, no big deal, you can go - at least it wasn't terrorism".

So many things people can concentrate on... but then they post absurd statements like these. I don't really care WHY someone has a loaded gun at a security checkpoint. I'd just rather not sit next to them.

I'm sure if you analyzed 10,000 incidents, you'd find some that were innocent mistakes, others that were intentional. I'd just rather not sit next to you on a plane if you are packing.

SSSS for some reason said...

"...It doesn't make anyone safe from random violence... It is about keeping people safe on the airplane... It's TSA, thats our job. ...

But why even explain it, I doubt you would ever accept any answer given."

I understand your answer. You are just doing your job and following the orders given. Good for you.

The problem I have with your answer is the unthinking response you offer when confronted with absurd policies.

Your job is to keep the airplane safe. Fine. That is an acceptable mission. Admirable even.

But, and this is where so many of us loose whatever faith we had left in the TSA as an option.... Your reporting finding things that it is your job to find. And the reporting is done in such a way as to make you doing the absolute minimum of your job seems like your being really successful.

Wow, a loaded handgun found in a bag.

Yes, the moron carrying it needs to be dealt with because that is just stupid.

No, there is no need for the TSA to make it news because you didn't stop a terrorist, you stopped an idiot.

If the person with the loaded handgun really was a bad guy, the minute he was discovered he would have started shooting. That is what would make him a bad guy.

If the idiot didn't start shooting up the airport, it is so very unlikely that he is going to start shooting up the airplane.

And, like some of the other commenters said already, it's a gun. It's metal. If it is in the bag, the x-ray will catch it. If it's on the passenger, the WMD will catch it. None of that makes the case for your fancy scanners and 'enhanced pat-downs.'

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"What is it about keeping people who are flying safe from your Jihadist wanting to kill a bunch of infidels and keeping people who are flying safe from your whacko looking to kill a bunch of people for headlines that you can not connect as being the same goal?"

The question is: is it a useful goal? If all you do is move the location of the killing to someplace else have you accomplished anything useful? The TSA's view of things is too narrow.

"Now I did say "we cant rely on profiling alone"... I mistyped. I added "alone" in error. What I meant to do was point out that we can't rely on profiling (and in that I mean singling out "middle-eastern looking" people) as some here would like to see happen. I was trying show that profiling doesn't work for what we're doing."

I agree with you on this - profiling is useless.

Anonymous said...

"People get really hung up on wondering how many people who got caught with guns were "terrorists". Who cares?"

Who cares? Congress, the traveling public, airline passengers, to name a few.

" They aren't tasked solely with stopping terrorist plots."

Really? Please tell us what the TSA is tasked. Admittedly, if you read the TSA blog, you'd think they're tasked with finding tropical fish, dangerous hair brushes and gun-shaped decorations but please enlighten us.

" Loaded weapons have never been allowed on planes."

Nonsense. They're allowed now with the FFDO and FAM programs and passengers used to be allowed to carry although that has been quite a while.

Anonymous said...

"What is it about keeping people who are flying safe from your Jihadist wanting to kill a bunch of infidels and keeping people who are flying safe from your whacko looking to kill a bunch of people for headlines that you can not connect as being the same goal?"

Yes, those of us who think that strip searching senior citizens truly support jihadists and their nefarious plots. Molest our children in the name of passenger safety!

But first, stop the name-calling. It's a violation of the AUP and should not be allowed.

What we expect for our nearly $100B spent on the TSA - and what Congress is in the process of doing - is effective security. The government policy in effect on 9/11 that encouraged aircraft crews to hand over control of an aircraft if the hijackers would phycially harm passengers has been rescinded. Cockpit doors are hardened. Can you explain how "jihadists" would gain control of an aircraft today?


"Now I did say "we cant rely on profiling alone"... I mistyped. I added "alone" in error. What I meant to do was point out that we can't rely on profiling (and in that I mean singling out "middle-eastern looking" people) as some here would like to see happen. I was trying show that profiling doesn't work for what we're doing. "

Yet you identify the threat as being jihadists. Is there any common characteristic shared by those interested in pursuing jihad? Also, be aware that every effective LE and security organization relies on profiling but none on so vapid a characteristic as someone "looking" to be of one ethnicity or another. Suggesting that we profile on how someone looks is silly and underlines the lack of seriousness of an organization whose screeners would suggest such a thing.

Anonymous said...

"So many things people can concentrate on... but then they post absurd statements like these. I don't really care WHY someone has a loaded gun at a security checkpoint. I'd just rather not sit next to them."

I'm more concerned that you might expose me to a contagious disease. Next time you fly, please show up with your complete medical records and recent tests showing no disease.

I understand that this is burdensome but my safety is paramount and trumps your privacy and freedom. If you don't like it, don't fly.

Anonymous said...

"Me neither! But I'd like to extend this to public restrooms. I don't want to be in a stall next to fellow who might have throwing stars! Please let's guard those.
"

Absolutely. I always worry about the people sitting next to me at restaurants, particularly those that serve alcohol. Could the TSA please screen people going into my favorite restaurant? I'm scared and need to know I'm safe.

(screenshot captured)

rwilymz said...

What does one have to do to get comments posted here?

RB said...

What does one have to do to get comments posted here?

February 2, 2012 12:02 PM

.......................
Send a note to the DHS OIG.

DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov

Censorship on this taxpayer funded blog is a clear civil rights violation and calls into question the integrity and honesty of the TSA Blog Team.

Anonymous said...

"And, like some of the other commenters said already, it's a gun. It's metal. If it is in the bag, the x-ray will catch it. If it's on the passenger, the WMD will catch it. None of that makes the case for your fancy scanners and 'enhanced pat-downs."

Yeah guns getting on to the airplane isn't that much of a worry since they won't make it through a WTMD without setting it off and they are pretty easy to spot on the xray. But the enhanced pat downs were not implemented in response to a hightened threat of firearms...

If you'll remember the failed Christmas day/underwear bomber. The only reason why that plane didn't go down is because the bomb sucked. That dude succeeded in getting past traditional airport security measures (at a foreign airport I would like to point out) used, X-ray and WTMD.

Gotta remember TSA is reactive generally. Most of the new measures taken were in response to failed or foiled plots, not because TSA said, "hey, baddies could try this, lets ban liquids over 3.4oz". This inludes the new pat downs and body scanners.

A bomb that a guy can wear like underwear and walk right through the checkpoints with? Yeah, TSA is gunna implement measures to mitigate that threat. Have we caught any terrorists with suicide undies since? No. Have we caught lots of people smuggling drugs and other things like this thanks to the scanners and new pat downs? YUP!. I've been there for em and seen them myself.

Now I already know what you're going to say... drugs =/= terrorist. True, but it doesn't exactly take an incredible leap of imagination to see how what is drugs could be something far more nefarious.

Anonymous said...

"As a TSO I'm there to help keep bad things from happening on an airplane, not to keep you from being the victim of random violence off of the airplane. Just like when I was in the Navy, I was helping to fight the badguys, not keep you from being the victim of random violence at home."

Bob - Where's my post in response to this post? It completely complied with the AUP and you censored it. Shame on you. Where's your compliance with the Constitution?

(screenshot captured and sent to Rep Mica)

Stan said...

Seems to me that every single one of these items could have been found by a standard metal detector without the cost and invasion of privacy related to the nude body imaging machines and invasive pat downs.

rwilymz said...

Then why aren't you posting them?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"If you'll remember the failed Christmas day/underwear bomber. The only reason why that plane didn't go down is because the bomb sucked."

First, that small of a bomb would not necessarily bring down the plane even if it did go off.

Second, it's questionable that the new scanners would have been able to spot it even if they had been in use. They aren't explosive detectors, they are shape detectors. They will only work if you are dumb enough to keep the explosive in a big square brick.

Anonymous said...

"If you'll remember the failed Christmas day/underwear bomber. The only reason why that plane didn't go down is because the bomb sucked."

Nonsense. There wasn't nearly enough explosive to say that the plane would have "[gone] down." There would have likely been deaths in the cabin, likely but it is unlikely that the damage would have been sufficient to render the airplane incapable of continued flight. But then, I'm only an aircraft structural engineer, not a crack TSO.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said at 5:33 pm on 2/2/2012...
If you'll remember the failed Christmas day/underwear bomber. The only reason why that plane didn't go down is because the bomb sucked. That dude succeeded in getting past traditional airport security measures (at a foreign airport I would like to point out) used, X-ray and WTMD.

I remember it, and it wasn't just because it as a "sucky" bomb...

He didn't just succeed in getting past the traditional security measures... If I recall, he was escorted through / taken around some or all of it, he didn't have a passport and was originally denied boarding, intelligence officials requested that the state department accept the visa request, something occurred behind the scenes to allow him to board anyway, he was never placed on the no-fly list despite repeated warnings from his dad and British intelligence, paid cash for a one-way ticket and had no luggage, etc... Yes, I remember it...

I also remember the lacksidaisical response after the plane landed as well as the official response noting that the "system worked". (Not to mention all of the revised stories since then.) If the system worked - why did we need to change it?

Have we caught lots of people smuggling drugs and other things like this thanks to the scanners and new pat downs? YUP!. I've been there for em and seen them myself.

This is not part of TSA's mission - and as a government agency that is obligated to report anything that they find on a passenger and beleive may be a violation of law, it would appear that anything outside their limited scope to search for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries would potentially cross the line into a warrantless search. (This is not meant to imply that I encourage or support illicit activity.) I do believe that a breach of the Constitution is far more serious a concern than some of the illegal activities that TSA has reported though (as they had nothing to do with their mission).

Anonymous said...

Wow;
I live in Tucson, Arizona and can tell you that mentally challenged individuals can kill people with the fire arms. If an individual is unaware or forgot they were carrying a firearm, then I wonder about their mental state. I understand that most will answer 'I forgot' when they get caught. I would like to see a significant penalty or have them carry a sign saying "I am stupid".
TSA stopping fire arms is part of their job but it is still newsworthy that people still think they don't have to follow any rules. My 2 cents.

Anonymous said...

"it would appear that anything outside their limited scope to search for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries would potentially cross the line into a warrantless search."

The evidence is often excluded and would be discounted on any jury I am a member.


"(This is not meant to imply that I encourage or support illicit activity.) "

Sadly, the TSA condones this illicit activity by participating in it.

(screenshot captured)

Anonymous said...

"Was the passenger detained and interrogated because he/she was carrying more than $10,000?"

Perhaps the passenger was detained because so that the TSO could steal the money, as is alleged at JFK.

Who is in charge at JFK? First, strip searched senior citizens and now this? Time to put the entire TSA under a microscope; I suspect there are more violations - where there's smoke, there's fire.

(screenshot captured)

Anonymous said...

"(screenshot captured and sent to Rep Mica)

February 2, 2012 9:25 PM"
--------------
Wow! Talk about an inflated view of one's self importance. I'm sure Mica really cares about your little blog post.
This reminds me of my little brother who used to run to my parents; "I'm Tellin, I'm Tellin"

Anonymous said...

"Wow! Talk about an inflated view of one's self importance. I'm sure Mica really cares about your little blog post.
This reminds me of my little brother who used to run to my parents; "I'm Tellin, I'm Tellin""

You are obviously ignorant of Rep Mica's activities. He has asked for the public's help in collecting details of TSA's misdeeds. Given that roughly 50% of my posts that comply with the AUP are deleted and that TSA is a government agency supported by taxpayer money and, therefore, accountable to the public, my post was correctly annotated with a notice of submitting my comment to Rep Mica. I believe that the government exists for the people and that our Representatives work for the public.

Your post, on the other hand, was published even though it violated the AUP. No apology is necessary but please familiarize yourself with the policy.

Bob - Why was this the post excerpted above posted? It clearly violated the AUP.

(Screenshot captured and forwarded to Rep Mica)

Anonymous said...

Anon said
You are obviously ignorant of Rep Mica's activities. He has asked for the public's help in collecting details of TSA's misdeeds. Given that roughly 50% of my posts that comply with the AUP are deleted and that TSA is a government agency supported by taxpayer money and, therefore, accountable to the public, my post was correctly annotated with a notice of submitting my comment to Rep Mica. I believe that the government exists for the people and that our Representatives work for the public.

Your post, on the other hand, was published even though it violated the AUP. No apology is necessary but please familiarize yourself with the policy.

Bob - Why was this the post excerpted above posted? It clearly violated the AUP.

(Screenshot captured and forwarded to Rep Mica)
-----------------------------------
Somehow I think that Rep Mica is a little smarter than you are giving him credit for. Even he can tell when somebody's tin foil hat is too tight that they think everything is a conspiracy against them. Labeling everything as screenshot saved is a little paranoid (in my opinion)

(Screen shot saved and sent to the supreme court)

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Labeling everything as screenshot saved is a little paranoid (in my opinion)

Paranoia? Then why are submitted posts mysteriously not making it to these pages? I've had this happen myself.

Anonymous said...

DERP

Anonymous said...

that scares me hmmm derp herp derp derp derp derp depr herp herp?

Anonymous said...

"Somehow I think that Rep Mica is a little smarter than you are giving him credit for."

A total non-sequitur. I think he's quite intelligent.

"Even he can tell when somebody's tin foil hat is too tight that they think everything is a conspiracy against them."

Who said anything about a conspiracy? Once again, you're postulated something totally unsupported by the facts. I'm alleging incompetence and dishonesty, not conspiracy.


"Labeling everything as screenshot saved is a little paranoid (in my opinion)"

Then don't label your posts that way. I find that my posts are much more likely to be "approved" when that's included.

"(Screen shot saved and sent to the supreme court)"

Pointless but it worked to get your post approved.

RB said...

"Labeling everything as screenshot saved is a little paranoid (in my opinion)"

Then don't label your posts that way. I find that my posts are much more likely to be "approved" when that's included.

"(Screen shot saved and sent to the supreme court)"

Pointless but it worked to get your post approved.

February 7, 2012 11:11 PM
............................

Censorship on this blog is just a tad under 33% of all submitted post not being allowed.

Each and every submitted post is a violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Now that wouldn't be the case if Blogger Bob wants to create his own personal blog and post about TSA but while our tax dollars are paying his and others salaries and our taxes are used to buy computers and services TSA must comply with the Constitution.

TSA, Blogger Bob and any other people involved with this blog effort are acting in a criminal manner.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"Wow! Talk about an inflated view of one's self importance. I'm sure Mica really cares about your little blog post.
This reminds me of my little brother who used to run to my parents; "I'm Tellin, I'm Tellin""

You are obviously ignorant of Rep Mica's activities. He has asked for the public's help in collecting details of TSA's misdeeds. Given that roughly 50% of my posts that comply with the AUP are deleted and that TSA is a government agency supported by taxpayer money and, therefore, accountable to the public, my post was correctly annotated with a notice of submitting my comment to Rep Mica. I believe that the government exists for the people and that our Representatives work for the public.

Your post, on the other hand, was published even though it violated the AUP. No apology is necessary but please familiarize yourself with the policy.

Bob - Why was this the post excerpted above posted? It clearly violated the AUP.

(Screenshot captured and forwarded to Rep Mica)

February 4, 2012 7:49 PM

---------
There's that inflated sense of self import I was talkin about in full bloom!!

Anonymous said...

"There's that inflated sense of self import I was talkin about in full bloom!!"

Do you feel unimportant? If so, try standing for something and not just criticizing others. It will work wonders.

If that works, try reading the Constitution and possibly some John Stuart Mill. Perhaps you'll see that liberty for yourself and your progeny is more important than a job, no matter what your alternatives are.

Anonymous said...

Why don't they line the fence lines with spike strips that will stop a vehicle from breaching the airport?

Anonymous said...

I can't believe people have throwing stars. Are they ninjas?!