Friday, June 15, 2012

TSA Week in Review: Live Blasting Cap Discovered in Carry-on Bag at Redmond


Live Blasting Cap – A live blasting cap was discovered in a passenger’s carry-on bag at Redmond (RDM)
Live Blasting Cap – A live blasting cap was discovered in a passenger’s carry-on bag at Redmond (RDM). If you’re not familiar with blasting caps, they are actually a small explosive charge that sets off a larger explosive charge. It’s one of the components of a bomb that our officers are trained to look for. The passenger was arrested by local law enforcement.

Stun gun, grenade belt buckle, razor blade in shoe, and throwing knives.
 Cell Phone Stun Gun – A stun gun made to look like a cell phone was discovered at Indianapolis (IND). 10 other stun guns were discovered at checkpoints around the nation at: BUR, BWI, CAK, 2 at DEN, GSP, HRL, SAN, and 2 at SFO.


Body Scanner Discoveries This Week – There were a total of 9 illegal and prohibited items discovered this week with the body scanners at BNA, DRO, EWR, HNL, LAX, LIH, PBI, SEA, and SMF. Among the items were a tube of toothpaste stuffed in a passenger’s waistband and drugs. Finding these types of items in areas where explosives could also be hidden is a testament that the technology works. 

Walking on a Razor’s Edge - A razor blade was found concealed in the sole of a shoe at LaGuardia (LGA).
People Say the Darndest Things – Here is an example of what not to say at the airport. Statements like these not only delay the people who said them but can also inconvenience lots of other passengers if the checkpoint has to be evacuated:

After missing a flight at Denver (DEN), a passenger told the gate agent: “I am going to blow up Southwest Airlines!”

While and officer was explaining the pat-down procedure to a passenger at Birmingham (BHM), she stated: “ I very well could have two bombs in my breasts.” When a supervisor arrived to speak with the passenger, she told them the same thing.
Miscellaneous Prohibited Items - In addition to all of the other prohibited items we find weekly, our Officers also found firearm components, realistic replica firearms, stun guns, brass knuckles, ammunition, batons, and oodles of knives.

Firearms - Here are the firearms our Officers found in carry-on baggage since I posted last Friday.

4 loaded firearms.
4 loaded firearms.
4 loaded firearms.
4 loaded firearms.
4 loaded firearms.
2 loaded firearms.








40 firearms discovered. 29 were loaded.







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. Firearm possession laws vary by state and locality. Travelers should familiarize themselves with state and local firearm laws for each point of travel prior to departure

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.

loaded firearm













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.


52 comments:

Anonymous said...

Have the body scanners ever caught any explosives? They seem to be great at catching drugs and toothpaste. I did see some stories that indicated the body scanners would likely have not caught the underwear bombs. The scanners seem like such a waste of taxpayer money. They caught nine items this week that weren't threats to the airplane.

I have questions about the toothpaste. What was the size of the confiscated toothpaste container? If the person with the toothpaste had 3.4 oz containers and a quart bag, would they have been allowed to transfer the toothpaste to the smaller containers and allowed to carry it on board the plane? If so, why is the toothpaste in the 3.4 oz containers and quart bag completely safe, while the larger container is unsafe?

Anonymous said...

First off a) Stop saying that finding harmless objects is a "testament that the technology works." It doesn't matter if your machines found it because a) that doesn't address the Fourth Amendment/privacy rights issues that everyone and their grandmother has been demanding explanations about (or the health issues) and b) THOSE OBJECTS POSE NO DANGER WHATSOEVER TO OTHER PASSENGERS - therefore, describing their discovery is downright irrelevant.

Secondly, your organization is involved in another massive scandal this week, and you mention nothing about it on your blog. If you cared about openness and professionalism, you would write about what happened rather than another blog entry about the discovery of a handful of objects that were probably not going to bring down any aircraft or hurt anyone.

Anonymous said...

You found a blasting cap clearly marked EXPLOSIVE. If only you had been so lucky in Fayetteville, NC when the Green Beret brought 5 lbs. of clearly marked C4 through the checkpoint.

Anonymous said...

Have you considered that policies that lead people to put toothpaste in their pants are stupid policies that make no one safer? Because they are. Almost as stupid as you people. Idiots.

Anonymous said...

Maybe people wouldn't say things about having bombs in their breasts if you didn't grope their breasts.

Anonymous said...

TSA to fire 7 airport workers for misconduct

http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/15/12243162-tsa-to-fire-7-airport-workers-for-misconduct?lite

The airport workers are accused of accepting or giving money in exchange for passing TSA employees in annual proficiency tests.

Unfortunately these sorts of occurrences are all too frequent which is why we talk about these finds.

Anonymous said...

Blogger Bob said:
"Finding these types of items in areas where explosives could also be hidden is a testament that the technology works."

Repeating a lie many times doesn't make it true.

You can't even prove that your scanners do better than simply choosing people at random to search.

Mike Toreno said...

"The airport workers are accused of accepting or giving money in exchange for passing TSA employees in annual proficiency tests."

Can you imagine? What do you think the TSA tests are like? I mean think about the ID checker. He stands at a podium, looks at the ID, doesn't know what it is, asks somebody, scribbles on a boarding pass. That's his job. That's what he does all day long.

OK, you have somebody whose JOB is standing at a podium, not knowing what an ID is, and scribbling on a boarding pass. And the TSA TESTS people on not knowing what an ID is and scribbling on the boarding pass.

And here we have somebody who CAN'T PASS THAT TEST and has to BRIBE somebody so he can pass it.

If the TSA had anything to do with security, that would be scary.

Melody Lynn said...

Boy if we don't have some ungrateful anonymous posters here. These are shameful to those who have lost loved ones due to box knives,unchecked firearms,IEDs,mas quantities of fertilizers and the components such as cell phones,timers,detonators and explosives due to them not being checked when boarding a commercial airline. Researching history and reading their true stories might encourage you to support this Government Agency trying to protect their citizens from acts of Terrisim which is very real in in our Country. I myself would not let any family member I have board a commercial flight without these securities in place.

Anonymous said...

“ I very well could have two bombs in my breasts.”

Can anyone explain why a passenger making an entirely true statement that does not constitute a threat is noteworthy? This strikes me as being similar to the TSA having the pilot arrested when he (quite correctly) pointed out that he didn't need a weapon to execute an act of terrorism.

Anonymous said...

"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. "

Fitting. Congress is giving the TSA friendly notice that the screener corps will be largely, if not completely, privatized.

Anonymous said...

Last week, all the scanners the TSA operates in airports throughout the entire United States found 12 "illegal and prohibited items." With the possible exception of the "punching weapon," none of them posed any threat to aviation.

This week, all the scanners the TSA operates in airports throughout the entire United States found only nine "illegal and prohibited items." One was a tube of toothpaste, which merits mention only because the TSA insists on (inconsistently) waging a very dubious War on Liquids. This item probably would have been cleared had it been inside a clear quart baggie, which only increases the difficulty of believing that the War on Liquids has any value. The other eight items were drugs that, while illegal, pose no threat to aviation and are completely outside the TSA's supposed "mission."

The "technology" is costing a billion of our tax dollars. It exposes us to unknown risks of radiation. It exposes us to the risk of loss or theft of the valuables we're commanded to "divest" for screening, a risk that includes identity theft.

Are you really telling us with a straight face that for all that cost and risk, the best this "technology" can do is find 9, 10, or 12 people hiding toothpaste and drugs?

I'm sorry, Bob. That is not a "testament that the technology works." The very fact that you persist in trying to spin embarrassing statistics that spell FAIL into a "testament" is testament to just how far from reality the TSA is.

Anonymous said...

Oh yea, I almost forgot...what about the fact that your group was caught LYING to a FOIA request? http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/tsa-fll-airport-admit-lying-in-foia-response-say-they-can/

Rox said...

Wow so many weapons! It is scary to think that some people may actually get away with it and carry these dangerous items on board. And regarding the Southwest comment, I am sure that lots of people think exactly the same, but hey, just don't think out loud! LOL

Anonymous said...

" Among the items were a tube of toothpaste stuffed in a passenger’s waistband and drugs. Finding these types of items in areas where explosives could also be hidden is a testament that the technology works. "

The TSA costs U.S. taxpayers $1,000,000 every hour of every day, 365 days a year and this is the garbage we get?

Rox said...

wow so many weapons! It is scary to think that some people may actually get away with carrying these items on board. And regarding the Southwest comment, I am sure that lots of passengers think the same but, hey don't think out loud! LOL

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"Oh yea, I almost forgot...what about the fact that your group was caught LYING to a FOIA request? http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/tsa-fll-airport-admit-lying-in-foia-response-say-they-can/"

Oh wow - that is so messed up. Unfortunately, it's also not a surprise.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"Fitting. Congress is giving the TSA friendly notice that the screener corps will be largely, if not completely, privatized."

Privatizing is not sufficient if they still have to foll the same brain-dead policies.

Anonymous said...

Melody Lynn said...
"Researching history and reading their true stories might encourage you to support this Government Agency trying to protect their citizens from acts of Terrisim which is very real in in our Country."

We do fully support the agencies that trying to protect us from terrorism. It's just that the TSA isn't one of them.

The TSA does exactly nothing to protect people from terrorists. In fact, they have created a great terrorist target with their security checkpoints. Lots of people and expensive equipment packed into a small area.

Anonymous said...

Ok, let's be real here...TSA was created to keep dangerous and deadly items off airplanes, we got that. What I find alarming however is the number of checkpoints and airports that are weak links in the system that, because of the way they do business, are potential introduction portals for dangerous or deadly items. The fact of the matter is this, whether we like it or not, Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT or the "body scanners"), the patdown, and explosive trace detection ARE the way to go if we are, in fact, going to cite IED's as a viable threat.The thing that disgusts me however is the constant crowing about how necessary these advanced systems are when there are checkpoints where the main charge of an IED can be readily introduced. It makes no sense to heavily "lock ALMOST all the doors" and then leave some vulnerable. This simply invites exploitation. I am, quite frankly, amazed that this vulnerability has not been exploited. Is this just good will by the bad guys or is the threat being overblown?

Wintermute said...

A couple of things: First, how many people were screened by your body scanners last week? And it came up with NINE false-positives and ZERO dangerous items? As mentioned countless times by others, repeatedly claiming that this proves anything does not make it any more true than the first time you uttered this falsehood.

Also, you found 40 guns week. Assuming that the nine false-positives were not counted as part of your 70% failure rate (Argue that rate's timeliness all you want. I've illustrated the logic in continuing to use it in previous comments.), then that means 90-ish made it through.

Finally, you do realize than an airline is nearly impossible to blow up, don't you? Saying "I'm going to blow up Southwest Airlines!" is akin to saying "I am going to kill [insert large geographic region here]." ie, it's not a credible threat and is just someone blowing off steam. Related, "I very well could have two bombs in my breasts." is a factual statement and is not a threat because, using your current scanning technology and procedures, as invasive as they are, the woman very well would have made it through security if that were the case.

For those defending the TSA, let me go ahead and counter some of your arguments ahead of time:

"You'd cry foul if the TSA were abolished and another 9/11 happened."

No, I wouldn't. First, another 9/11 is unlikely to happen ever again, screening or no. This is because of hardened cockpit doors and passenger awareness. Also, even if it somehow did, I would not cry foul. It's a risk of commercial flight. The TSA does nothing to reduce that risk. It's pretty small to begin with.

"The lack of domestic hijackings since the TSA came into existence proves that their methods are effective."

Correlation does not imply causation. I quit smoking around the same time the TSA came into existence. There is no relationship between the TSA's existence, me quitting smoking, and domestic hijackings. If you must find a correlation where one does not exist, please credit my cessation of smoking with airline safety. It makes as much sense as crediting the TSA.

"The 70% failure rate is not accurate. It's based on an old report."

So, it's the timeliness of the number, not the number itself, that you're arguing? In that case, I give you The Joint Majority Congressional Report on the TSA released in November 2011, Section II, page 3 - "TSA‘s passenger and checked baggage screening programs have been tested over the years, and while the test results are classified, their performance outcomes have changed very little since the creation of TSA." If the number was ever near 70%, then it still is. Simple logic.

"The TSO job is a thankless job." Or, very related, "You have no idea what a TSO goes through to make you safer."

First. Wah! I have a tough job. At least I do mine without violating anyone's rights and without being rude to anyone. Second, the TSA does not make us any safer. One could argue that the false sense of security it provides actually makes us less safe. I'm not making that argument here, mind you, but there are those who could make a very effective argument.

(This comment follows guidelines and, for once, isn't even snarky. Screenshot taken.)

Anonymous said...

TSA's policies have made traveling for work so miserable that I quit my job and took a 30k paycut, just so I didn't have to deal with TSA anymore. I guess in a way TSA has made sure I will never be harmed on an aircraft, by encouraging me to avoid it altogether. Good Work.

Wintermute said...

The TSA is actively censoring my on-topic posts yet again.

Anonymous said...

People listen, security is necessary for the safety of all. I respect the fact that the TSA found something, anything is better than nothing. If the TSA went all year long and found nothing, THEN I would say its a waste. Nothing in security is perfect. Consider how many people pass thru a TSA security checkpoint each day and I care that they find the little things. Remember when they tried to hijack a plane with a box cutter? If someone is sneaking something in, I dont care what it is cause they shouldn't be sneaking anything in! PERIOD!

Khürt Williams said...

What about this story?

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/06/15/tsa-testing-scandal-uncovered-at-philadelphia-international-airport/

http://articles.philly.com/2012-06-16/business/32269998_1_tsa-security-officers-transportation-security

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/tsa-proposes-terminations-of-7-philly-airport-workers-linked-to-alleged-bribery-scheme/2012/06/15/gJQAFSGYfV_story.html

Anonymous said...

I believe the TSA Officers are doing a great job. They are highly trained officers and a committed motivated department, they do everything humanly possible to ensure our safety and keep us safe, and I wanted to take this time to say thank you.

Anonymous said...

So is this just a blog listing contraband now? Is that what you're reduced to?

Anonymous said...

So... that grenade belt - we're all aware that it is in no way a past/present/future grenade, right? It's simply a casting of one side of a fake grenade. Seriously - the plunger handle is fused to the body... -.-

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said "TSA was created to keep dangerous and deadly items off airplanes."

No.

TSA was created to stop terrorist attacks. A gun on the plane is no danger in the hands of a person who means no harm (though I will agree that in practice guns on planes have to be banned).

On the other hand, five muscular men with no weapons can take down a plane and much more.

But yes, the TSA thinks its job is an Easter Egg hunt.

Anonymous said...

It looks like the body scanners aren't that great at catching things after all:

http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/watch-tsa-nude-body-scaners-get-defeated/

Do you care to comment on this video Bob?

JMF said...

TSA can't privatized." Big mistake, you keep what works!! if it ain't broke don't fix it, improve on it. We appreciate what these fine officers and the TSA does everyday. Their record proves it, as for the cry babies that don't? who cares?

We're talking about the Front lines here people.

oblivion2k said...

The Freedom of Information Act has given Jonathan Corbett the TSA security video of the day he proved that the AIT machines are easy to outsmart and therefore completely worthless. Here is a link:
https://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/watch-tsa-nude-body-scaners-get-defeated/

JoJo said...

Anonymous said...
People listen, security is necessary for the safety of all. I respect the fact that the TSA found something, anything is better than nothing. If the TSA went all year long and found nothing, THEN I would say its a waste. Nothing in security is perfect. Consider how many people pass thru a TSA security checkpoint each day and I care that they find the little things. Remember when they tried to hijack a plane with a box cutter? If someone is sneaking something in, I dont care what it is cause they shouldn't be sneaking anything in! PERIOD!
----
It's easy to find contraband when you make up your own list of it. Toothpaste? Fake grenades? Seriously, they're reporting that as a good catch and you're eating it up because "something is better than nothing"?

Screenshot taken!

Anonymous said...

I value my life and the life of my family. I am grateful that these policies are in place to protect us. There are some very mean people in our world and I want every policy in place that can protect my children and my family. Pat me down, check my bags, and do a full body scan. It makes me feel much safer. God forbid the policy is dropped and you sit beside someone who has a loaded gun and points it in your face. I bet many of you would appreciate the policies and the tax dollars spent then! My family is worth millions. And people please don't think that scandals don't happen everywhere. Another reason that we should understand that everyone does not have good intentions. Pat downs and bag searches are the least of our worries.

Anonymous said...

Thank YOU! TSA! I appreciate you keeping my family safe!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"I believe the TSA Officers are doing a great job."

You are free to believe anything you want. However, unless you have some evidence don't expect anyone else to agree with you.

Belief is cheap, proof is what counts.

Anonymous said...

Here's an interesting story:

http://www.fox4now.com/news/local/159663065.html

A former TSA screener apparently was given a patdown. When she demonstrated what happened during the patdown by groping the supervisor in the same way she was groped, she was arrested for battery. Why is it that the TSA can touch someone and it's standard procedure, but when somebody does it to a TSA worker, it is battery? This woman says her genitals and breasts were touched. It's standard procedure to touch genitals according to the TSA supervisor they interviewed. That seems excessive to get on a plane.

Anonymous said...

I learned a lot about the some of the pointless policies and methods of the TSA after flying internationally. Nobody in other countries had to remove their shoes. In some places, the war on liquids wasn't going on so people could carry their water bottles, etc. through security. Yet no planes fell from the sky.

I truly realized how pointless the liquid ban was when I arrived in Atlanta, cleared customs, and was waiting to go through security. A TSO dumped an x-ray bin full of partially full water & soda bottles into the trash can next to me and the security checkpoint. If all those liquids are so dangerous, why are they simply thrown into a regular trash can next to the checkpoint? The TSA knows they aren't dangerous, so why aren't they allowed through?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"It makes me feel much safer."

It make make you *feel* safer, but it isn't actually making you any safer.

The rest of us don't want to be abused just to make you feel nice.

Wintermute said...

Anonymous said...
"I value my life and the life of my family."

I value mine too.


"I am grateful that these policies are in place to protect us."

Except they don't.

"There are some very mean people in our world and I want every policy in place that can protect my children and my family."

As I said, the policies protect no one. The TSA's failure rate is approximately 70%.

"Pat me down, check my bags, and do a full body scan."

You can give up your rights all you want. Just don't ask me to give up mine, OK?

"It makes me feel much safer."

So, it's the illusion of security you're actually looking for.


"God forbid the policy is dropped and you sit beside someone who has a loaded gun and points it in your face."

That's a risk you take with any activity. Between disgruntled employees and students, random crime on the streets, and home invasions, no activity is 100% safe. Simply by being alive, you take some risk that some "mean person" out there somewhere may find you and do mean things. This does not mean that these mean things are likely to happen to, because they're not. But then, neither is a terrorist attack on an airplane. Especially with heightened passenger awareness and hardened cockpit doors. Why do you fear one event, but not the others?

"I bet many of you would appreciate the policies and the tax dollars spent then!"

Straw man argument. Invalid. It's an event that hasn't taken place, and is not likely to ever take place. However, no, I still would not give up my rights based on irrational fear that it might happen.

"My family is worth millions."

Actually, they're not. Chemically, each member is worth less than five bucks. If you were to illegally harvest your family's organs, and all organs are usable, then I'll give you that they're worth millions. However, that's not what you meant, and I am just being snarky. I know what you really meant ;)

"And people please don't think that scandals don't happen everywhere."

Agreed. But as a government agency, the TSA should be a little better at weeding out their bad apples. How can they expect us to believe they are effective at security when they can't keep their own house in order?

"Another reason that we should understand that everyone does not have good intentions."

That's presuming guilt. Luckily, our justice system works the other way around.

"Pat downs and bag searches are the least of our worries."

Speak for yourself. I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America. Warrant-less searches violate the rights enshrined within. I worry more about the erosion of rights than I do about the unlikely event of a terrorist attack. Statistically speaking, even with the tragedy of 9/11, you are more likely to die of a lightning strike than a terrorist attack. One could argue that a fear of lightning is therefor more rational than fear of terrorists.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
If all those liquids are so dangerous, why are they simply thrown into a regular trash can next to the checkpoint? The TSA knows they aren't dangerous, so why aren't they allowed through?

Don't expect an answer. Some of us have been pointing out the obvious inconsistencies for YEAR and have never gotten a real answer.

Anonymous said...

Finding toothpaste with a whole body imager does not show the technology works. It only shows the stupidity of the TSA. Toothpaste is not dangerous.

If a person wanted to carry a tube of something dangerous on board, it can be trivially taken through the checkpoint by placing where the sun does not shine (and body imagers don´t see).

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...

Pat me down, check my bags, and do a full body scan. "

Unless you're a terrorist the patdown is completely pointless. Why exactly would patting you down make you feel safer? Are you carrying a bomb you don't know about?

I'm not a terrorist, so patting me down is not only a violation of my rights under the 4th Amendment but a waste of time as well.

The TSA is not your friend and they aren't interested in real security. The fact that allegedly dangerous liquids like water and soda are simply dumped in a trash can at the checkpoint should tell even the most braindead of sheeple that.

Anonymous said...

It seems,in light of TSA's new policy of simply ignoring all the bad news regarding this agencies nasty behavior,that this blog has become utterly irrelevant and serves no purpose.

Anonymous said...

If a person wanted to carry a tube of something dangerous on board, it can be trivially taken through the checkpoint by placing where the sun does not shine (and body imagers don´t see).

No need to do even that. If a "tube of something dangerous" can fit "where the sun does not shine," it can fit in a Victory Baggie. It would then go through screening, with the TSA none the wiser.

No, I'm not giving terrorists ideas. The flaws in the War on Liquids are so obvious that any terrorist with an IQ greater than a houseplant can think of them all within a minute, just as any passenger with an IQ greater than a houseplant can immediately recognize that the War on Liquids is an absurd sham.

On the other hand, the TSA's wildly inconsistent implementation of stupid rules stands at least some chance of protecting us from a truly stupid terrorist who can't recognize and work around the obvious flaws. The only question is whether that degree of protection is worth the cost.

Meanwhile, I'm excitedly waiting for this week's "testament" of false positives and items that the security measures in place before the TSA could have caught. Will the all the scanners in all the airports in the US catch seven, nine, or ten people hiding drugs and toothpaste?

KTownsend said...

Dear wintermute : I love this: "This comment follows guidelines and, for once, isn't even snarky." This was posted just below your entry: "First. Wah! I have a tough job."

Question: What is YOUR definition of "snarky", because you, like it or not, exude "snarkiness". Get a life.

Anonymous said...

Nice for TSA screeners and their families to stop by to give Blogger Bob a hug or two. I hope the screeners weren't on duty!
This blog is the best evidence that the TSA doesn't work & is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Anonymous said...

"A former TSA screener apparently was given a patdown. When she demonstrated what happened during the patdown by groping the supervisor in the same way she was groped, she was arrested for battery. Why is it that the TSA can touch someone and it's standard procedure, but when somebody does it to a TSA worker, it is battery? This woman says her genitals and breasts were touched. It's standard procedure to touch genitals according to the TSA supervisor they interviewed. That seems excessive to get on a plane."

Yeah, any prosecutor who tries this case is likely to have it slam dunked back in his/her face, particularly if the former screener is able to back her assertion that what she did to the supervisor conformed with TSA policy.

And before any of the TSA apologists weigh in with their legal analyses: No, the TSA is not empowered to commit battery in pursuit of its mission.

Anonymous said...

"I value my life and the life of my family. I am grateful that these policies are in place to protect us. There are some very mean people in our world and I want every policy in place that can protect my children and my family."

You're obviously a loving person worried about your family. Unfortunately, you're also a very scared person, scared to the point of irrationality. I strongly suggest that you NEVER take your family out in public. There are drive-by shootings, drunk drivers and any number of threats you need to confront. It's clear you're not up to the challenge.

"Pat me down, check my bags, and do a full body scan. It makes me feel much safer."

I'm glad it makes you feel safer. It's doesn't actually make you safer, though, as the Congressional Report on the TSA would inform you.

"God forbid the policy is dropped and you sit beside someone who has a loaded gun and points it in your face."

I assume you only go to movie theaters and restaurants that screen patrons with body scanners, correct? Personally, I'll take my chances.


"My family is worth millions. And people please don't think that scandals don't happen everywhere."

You put a monetary value on your family? I don't. Mine is priceless. My Constitutional liberties are as well.

"Another reason that we should understand that everyone does not have good intentions."

Why do you assume the TSA has only good intentions? It is willing to violate the civil rights of millions of Americans daily for an $8B budget. It's kapos are willing to be complicit for a paycheck.

Anonymous said...

The TSA violates the U.S. Constitution and the legal tradition of being presumed innocent until proven guilty, therefore the TSA's activities must be reformed or stopped. Airplane companies can provide legal security checks prior to consenting to allow passengers to board their planes. However the government has no legal right to search passengers without a warrant. Any terrorist attack is tragic, but many more people have died in defending freedom from tyranny than from terrorist attacks. The tragic deaths of those who have died defending our liberty must not be squandered by us giving up our liberty and civil rights. It is cowardly to allow the TSA and other sectors of the government to attack our liberty, and our right to privacy and dignity.

Wintermute said...

KTownsend said...
"Dear wintermute : I love this: "This comment follows guidelines and, for once, isn't even snarky." This was posted just below your entry: "First. Wah! I have a tough job."

"Question: What is YOUR definition of "snarky", because you, like it or not, exude "snarkiness". Get a life."

Let me rephrase. The comment did not rise to my normal level of snarkiness... And I have a life, thanks. A rather nice one, too. But my life (or lack thereof) is irrelevant to the discussion ;)

Anonymous said...

"I respect the fact that the TSA found something, anything is better than nothing."

So you'll be signing up for the body cavity searches?