Friday, December 26, 2014

TSA Week in Review: 33 Loaded Firearms, Five Inert Grenades, Black Powder Pellets & More



Loaded firearm discovered in carry-on bag at ATL.
Loaded firearm discovered in carry-on bag at ATL
44 Firearms Discovered This Week Of the 44 firearms, 33 were loaded and 14 had rounds chambered. (Edited 1/1/15)

Primers & Pellets - 40 shotgun primers and 39 black powder pellets were discovered in a carry-on bag at Salt Lake City (SLC).  
40 shotgun primers and 39 black powder pellets were discovered in a carry-on bag at Salt Lake City (SLC).
Primers and pellets discovered in carry-on bag at SLC

Concealed Knives PHL
Concealed Knives PHL
Artfully Concealed Prohibited Items – It’s important to examine your bags prior to traveling to ensure you are not carrying any prohibited items. If a prohibited item is discovered in your bag or on your body, you could be cited and possibly arrested by law enforcement. Here are a few examples from this week where prohibited items were found by our officers in strange places.

  • An anomaly was detected with Advanced Imaging Technology in the center chest area of a Philadelphia (PHL) passenger. After a pat-down, a pen and highlighter combo was discovered that was concealing small knives.
  • A knife was discovered in a small box wrapped in foil at Tallahassee (TLH).

Inert Ordnance and Grenades etc. – We continue to find inert grenades and other weaponry on a weekly basis. Please keep in mind that if an item looks like a real bomb, grenade, mine, etc., it is prohibited. When these items are found at a checkpoint or in checked baggage, they can cause significant delays because the explosives detection professionals must respond to resolve the alarm. Even if they are novelty items, you are prohibited from bringing them on the aircraft.  Read here on why inert items cause problems.

  • Five inert grenades were discovered this week. Four were discovered in carry-on bags at Dallas Love (DAL), Chicago Midway (MDW), New Orleans (MSY), and Oakland (OAK), and one was discovered in a checked bag at Los Angeles (LAX).
From left, inert grenades discovered at: DAL, MSY & MDW
From left, inert grenades discovered at: DAL, MSY & MDW

Miscellaneous Prohibited Items In addition to all of the other prohibited items we find weekly, our officers also regularly find firearm components, realistic replica firearms, bb and pellet guns, airsoft guns, brass knuckles, ammunition, batons and many other prohibited items too numerous to note.
knives and throwing stars
From left, items discovered at: TUS, BDL, PIT, SAN, DTW & SNA
Ammo discovered in carry-on bag at CLT.
Ammo discovered in carry-on bag at CLT.
Stun Guns – 20 stun guns were discovered in carry-on bags this week. Two were discovered at Denver (DEN), and the remainder were found at Albuquerque (ABQ), Atlanta (ATL), Bismarck (BIS), Buffalo (BUF), Dallas Love (DAL), Detroit (DTW), Dickinson (DIK), Lafayette (LFT), Las Vegas (LAS), Minneapolis (MSP), Nashville (BNA), Norfolk (ORF),  Phoenix (PHX), Pitt-Greenville (PGV), Reno (RNO), Sacramento (SMF), Salt Lake City (SLC), and St. Louis (STL). 

Ammunition – When packed properly, ammunition can be transported in your checked baggage, but it is never permissible to pack ammo in your carry-on bag.

Clockwise from top left, firearms discovered at: HOU, RSW, ATL, RDU, LAS & ATL
Clockwise from top left, firearms discovered at: HOU, RSW, ATL, RDU, LAS & ATL
Loaded Firearms
Top (HOU), Bottom (DTW)
44 Firearms Discovered This Week – Of the 44 firearms, 33 were loaded and 14 had rounds chambered.
(Spreadsheet Edited 1/1/15) *In order to provide a timely weekly update, this data is compiled from a preliminary report. The year-end numbers will vary slightly from what is reported in the weekly updates. However, any monthly, midyear or end-of-year numbers TSA provides on this blog or elsewhere will be actual numbers and not estimates.



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 line is slowed down and a passenger that likely had no ill intent ends up with a citation or in some cases is even arrested. The passenger can face a penalty as high as $7,500. 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.

If you haven’t seen it yet, make sure you check out our TSA Blog Year in Review for 2013. You can also check out 2011 & 2012 as well. 

Follow @TSABlogTeam on Twitter and Instagram! 

Bob Burns

TSA Blog Team 

If you have a travel related issue or question that needs an immediate answer, you can contact us by clicking here.

62 comments:

JFF T said...

I get these updates every week and it never ceases to amaze me at the number of STUPID People who try to bring these items through Airport Checkpoints.

When are they gonna learn?

Anonymous said...

Yup, more INERT, REPLICA, or TOY private property confiscated by the US government under the false flag of "security."

Theft, plain and simple.

Anonymous said...

So who is the TSA going to claim is the "bad apple" in this case? The whistle-blower or the TSA employees who retaliated against her?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/17/tsa-canine-office-fired-special-counsel-charleston-south-carolina/20530553/

SSSS for Some Reason said...

Yeah! The Nudie-Scanners get a score this week!

Not a very exciting one to be sure, but by your scoring system its a big deal.

And then you loose whatever momentum you might have had by recycling photos again. All of the photos of the grenades have been used before. It kinda makes the general public wonder if you actually found them or are just padding up a report in an attempt to remain relevant.

Battlebotbob said...

To the commenter on the whistle blower story. Thanks for providing the link. That is an unbelievable excuse to fire someone; obviously used for retalliation. TSA better clean house. The problem with TSA is putting too much power in the hands of some incompetent/abusive people. Indeed most are good, but this will always be a problem, and your example is a clear example. Fired for cursing after her car was hit, after reporting timecard fraud. Shame on TSA.

Anonymous said...

As always, absolutely nothing you needed your slow, invasive, and ineffective naked body scanners to detect. Meanwhile, how many people suffered physical searches thanks to false alarms on these useless machines?

Why are Curtis Burns and West Cooper unwilling to address, let alone answer, that question?

How many weeks has it been since you last trumpeted something dangerous you found with the naked body scanners?

RB said...

Battlebotbob said...To the commenter on the whistle blower story. Thanks for providing the link. That is an unbelievable excuse to fire someone; obviously used for retalliation. TSA better clean house. The problem with TSA is putting too much power in the hands of some incompetent/abusive people. Indeed most are good, but this will always be a problem, and your example is a clear example. Fired for cursing after her car was hit, after reporting timecard fraud. Shame on TSA.December 27, 2014 at 11:04 AM

**********************
If TSA cleaned house there would be no TSA left. A pile of dung is still, ....well, dung!

And not one word from TSA on the total failure of TSA security that allowed an airport worker to transport over 100 guns, some loaded, in the cabins of passenger aircraft.

Guess everyone on those flights are lucky that these people only wanted to traffic in arms and not hijack an airplane because they certainly had the means thanks to TSA.

This security failure by TSA should result in the firing of all SES level TSA employees including Pistole.

cliffontheroad said...

stun guns should be allowed. The captain won't allow access to the flight deck to anyone anyway, and if someone was banging on the door, a passenger with the gun could shoot him/her.

Replica weapons should be allowed under the same conditions as a real gun.

Why wasn't the tsa employee fired for letting the passenger with the pen weapon into the body scanner while something was still in his pocket. Or did the body-image contraceptive machine need a boost of notoriety?

Wow. New feature. This blog, or the recaptcha not-a-robot routine now searches inside your computer for a google account.

But don't pick 'logout' because it will throw away your comments and make you start over.

cliffontheroad said...

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Oh so many other expressions pass through my mind about why people become police or like to flaunt their authority over others.

A very entertaining video series on YouTube is from Austrialia TV where people try to skirt regulations on food imports, etc.

A random episode is: Border Security Austrailia.s07e05
by rameshpratap20. I know Australia is spelled wrong, but there is no advertising front end.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6hM9jyNPYg

Another series called Airport 24/7: Miami | Season 1 | Episode 1 | The Passenger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdcFzl7Mt_4

covers many aspects and slips in a few facts such as TSA finding 1300 guns per year and Miami keeping $7 million taken from passengers.

Yet the power play by TSA, in the interests of security, is shown by the example of the worlds largest plane (500+) having 2:20 hours to turn around before the airline would have to pay more, and passengers delayed.

At 11 minutes into the video comes the agents who decide to inspect the aircraft totally and leaves only 50 minutes to clean and load the passengers.

This link (same video) will jump directly there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdcFzl7Mt_4#t=662

Note that the TSA agent doesn't trust the cleaning crew, and shows no concern about delaying the aircraft, which reminds me of events of TSA failures which close terminals.

BTW: the 3 ounce limit being upped to 3.4 ounces was because of me. (they made the rule but no one read the actual label on a toothpaste tube.)

Judy said...

Thanks for all you do. I like your blog and I quickly learned to ignore all the endless snarky anonymous comments. Happy New Year.

Wintermute said...

SSSS for Some Reason said...
Yeah! The Nudie-Scanners get a score this week!

Not a very exciting one to be sure, but by your scoring system its a big deal.


So, did the knives have metal blades? If so, the WTMD would have caught them... Too bad the owner of those knives apparently wasn't aware of the giant blind spot, otherwise they'd still have them.

Anonymous said...

@cliffontheroad

That sure looks like Customs and not TSA in that video... maybe you should at least understand what you are complaining about...

Anonymous said...

cliffontheroad said...

Another series called Airport 24/7

Yet the power play by TSA, in the interests of security, is shown by the example of the worlds largest plane (500+) having 2:20 hours to turn around before the airline would have to pay more, and passengers delayed.

At 11 minutes into the video comes the agents who decide to inspect the aircraft totally and leaves only 50 minutes to clean and load the passengers.

Note that the TSA agent doesn't trust the cleaning crew, and shows no concern about delaying the aircraft, which reminds me of events of TSA failures which close terminals.

As usual, you folks are in such a hurry to fault TSA that you completly miss the facts. You blame TSA and yet those who searched this plane are clearly CBP, NOT TSA. TSA had NOTHING to do with this.
If you are going to bash someone, make sure you know who the heck you are talking about or you run the risk of looking like a fool.

RB said...

Still nothing from TSA explaining how TSA Security can't stop loaded guns from being introduced to the sterile area and then walked on an airplane.

How's that "Feeling Safe" deal working out for you people?

djhartm said...

The majority of these finds are accidents, like mine was, yet the TSA portrays them as criminal with nefarious intent, which is wrong and deceitful.

Am I regretful that I forgot my firearm in my laptop bag? Absolutely!

Did I do so with the intent to harm others? Absolutely not.

The fact that the TSA uses this blog to bolster it's support by claiming it thwarted potential terrorist attacks is dubious at best.

Anonymous said...

One of your coworkers, Nico M, says if you sign up and pay for precheck you'll get expedited screening "every time." That doesn't jibe with what you say here on this TSA website. Who is right?

Falcon-One said...

Anonymous said...
Yup, more INERT, REPLICA, or TOY private property confiscated by the US government under the false flag of "security."

Theft, plain and simple.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This is NOT Theft. Every passenger is given the options to:

1. Check it in there checked baggage.

2. Take it out to their car.

3. Give it to someone who is not traveling with them.

4. Dispose of it themselves.

5. Voluntarily abandon it to the TSA.

Anonymous said...

TSA conspiracy theorists (i.e.Susan) have two things in common: lack of formal education and gainful employment.

Susan Richart said...

"Anonymous said...

TSA conspiracy theorists (i.e.Susan) have two things in common: lack of formal education and gainful employment.

December 31, 2014 at 10:11 PM"

And you would be oh so wrong yet again.

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Chip in Florida said...

You have a posted policy regarding personal attacks but then allow certain posters to post personal attacks. It makes the general public suspicious of your motives as an organization when TSA employees are allowed to violate your posted policies, we have to wonder what other policies are being broken....

8 Billion a year, we expect better from you.

Anonymous said...

Like you TSAnonymous morons who somehow get their comments approved even when they contain personal attacks?

Anonymous said...

@ Every Falcon-One (TSA Employee)

One cannot "voluntarily abandon" (don't you mean surrender?) private property under duress from gov't employees. Our property is confiscated and dumped in a landfill, taken by TSA employees, or sold by state governments. Your "solutions" are unusable because

1. TSA employees do not tell passengers their options

2. Slow TSA lines

3. Distance to remote (afforadable) parking

4. Checked luggage is already in process and not available

5. Lack of any mail services (or even mail boxes) in the public areas

6. People are not always flying from their home cities

I was overseas earlier this year and that country's TSA equivalent confiscated a corkscrew from me. (Ironically, it was allowed by the TSA.) I, of course, was unhappy about the seizure of my property, but more accepting of the situation because they made no claim that my property was anything but being confiscated, seized by their gov't.

They didn't lie. Why does the TSA? And why do you specifically lie?

Anonymous said...

West, why did you allow the TSAnonymous comment from December 31, 10:11pm. It clearly violates blog policy and is only meant to attack and insult other commenters.

Anonymous said...

I continue to wait for some justification for active duty military being included in pre-check, but not retired military or holders of current DoD or LE background investigations. military retirees have at least 20 years documented service to this Nation, pretty much proving their lack of risk. both DoD and LE background investigations should reveal any risk factors. active duty military do not, necessarily, have a background check or any significant length of service. neither citizenship nor a background investigation is required to enlist in the military, in fact there are likely illegal immigrants serving. if it is really about safety, then why are potentially unscreened non-citizens allowed through? sounds like it is just pandering to an admirable group to get PR, not adjusting the rules to ease screening on those who present a lower likelihood of threat.
Let me be clear: pre-911 screening should be the norm. it is all that is required, now that cockpit doors have been reinforced and locked, and flight crews and passengers know that the rules have changed and passivity=death. however, if we are going to continue this massive waste of tax dollars on security theatre, at least have _some_ of the rules make sense. now you're even allowing college kids (kaydets) to endure more reasonable screening, but those who served and sacrificed for 20+ have to take their bloody shoes and belts off!!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
West, why did you allow the TSAnonymous comment from December 31, 10:11pm. It clearly violates blog policy and is only meant to attack and insult other commenters.

January 5, 2015 at 12:55 AM
-----------------------------
obviously because it was a TSA employee attacking one of those who rightly question TSA.

Anonymous said...

Seems to me that at least one participant here has grounds for an ethics complaint against the TSA in general and Bob and West in particular.

Anonymous said...

The majority of these finds are accidents, like mine was, yet the TSA portrays them as criminal with nefarious intent, which is wrong and deceitful. I have never heard or read anything from TSA that would suggest they are criminals. Perhaps your interpritation?

Am I regretful that I forgot my firearm in my laptop bag? Absolutely!

Did I do so with the intent to harm others? Absolutely not.

The fact that the TSA uses this blog to bolster it's support by claiming it thwarted potential terrorist attacks is dubious at best. again, never heard or seen them make that claim.

Anonymous said...

One cannot "voluntarily abandon" (don't you mean surrender?) private property under duress from gov't employees. Our property is confiscated and dumped in a landfill, taken by TSA employees, or sold by state governments. Your "solutions" are unusable because

1. TSA employees do not tell passengers their options

2. Slow TSA lines

3. Distance to remote (afforadable) parking

4. Checked luggage is already in process and not available

5. Lack of any mail services (or even mail boxes) in the public areas

6. People are not always flying from their home cities

because none of the options fit your need, does not mean they are unusable. TSA gives the oprtions, if you choose to accept them, thats on you.

I was overseas earlier this year and that country's TSA equivalent confiscated a corkscrew from me. (Ironically, it was allowed by the TSA.) . Cork screws are allowed to travel unless it has a blade on it. I, of course, was unhappy about the seizure of my property, but more accepting of the situation because they made no claim that my property was anything but being confiscated, seized by their gov't.

They didn't lie. Why does the TSA? And why do you specifically lie? are you lieing or exagerating?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"Seems to me that at least one participant here has grounds for an ethics complaint against the TSA in general and Bob and West in particular."

I'd say all the TSOs attacked on this site have a valid complaint. Great point!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous complaining about personal attacks said...

"Like you TSAnonymous morons"

Hypocrisy at its finest.

Anonymous said...

"I quickly learned to ignore all the endless snarky anonymous comments."

If you ignore them, how do you know they are endlessly snarky?

Anonymous said...

"I have never heard or read anything from TSA that would suggest they are criminals."

That is exactly the point. TSA reports the discovery of guns and such here (photos and all) to scare the public, yet nobody from whom one of those items has been confiscated has been arrested and prosecuted as a terrorist. Former TSA Chief Pistole even told the press that finding these guns is a 'distraction' from TSA's primary mission.

"TSA conspiracy theorists (i.e.Susan) have two things in common: lack of formal education and gainful employment."

Dismissing your personal attack on Susan as a lame admission that you have no meaningful arguments to make, I suggest that it is the TSA itself that is the conspiracy theorist. How else do you explain a government agency treating every air traveler as a threat by default? TSA is so paranoid that it subjects EVERY traveler to screening levels more suited to screening convicted felons in a prison. If you do not want a public employee's hands in your crotch, the trade-off is a background check and surrender of biometric data. TSA offers no data to suggest that PreCheck is even minimally effective; lacking that, I suggest PreCheck is simply a tool to shut up TSA critics so that TSA does not have to defend its paranoid approach to air travel security. TSA used to subject millions of travelers to medically unnecessary x-rays, you know! TSA still generates nude images of most flyers. Nude images! That they are computer-generated rather than the product of a TSA employee and a camera makes no difference; the practice continues to be a violation of basic human rights. Out of paranoia, TSA still confiscates innocuous items from the public: large bottles of water, snow globes, tiny plastic toy guns, etc. TSA once confiscated a 2-inch plastic toy gun! How much more paranoid can you get?

"Voluntarily abandon it to the TSA."

Let's not trade in euphemisms here. It's a confiscation, and everybody knows it.

"TSA gives the oprtions, if you choose to accept them, thats on you."

If you can't be bothered to question the efficacy of those policies and procedures so as to hold TSA accountable to the Constitution and its use of taxpayer funds, that's on you.

Anonymous said...

This blog is a distraction as it is designed to make people believe the TSA is keeping us safe.

Yet, again, screeners are supposed to give people options regarding disposition of contraband. How often do they really do that? 1 time out of 10, maybe. I don't think I have ever heard a passenger given any options. The screener just take whatever it is and tosses it away.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Anonymous complaining about personal attacks said...

"Like you TSAnonymous morons"

Hypocrisy at its finest.


It's called irony, and was used to illustrate a point. Seems that point has been made.

Anonymous said...

WEST - This comment section is eating replies, rather than allowing them to be submitted.

Pudintane said...

One of our Anonymous friends wrote: "I'd say all the TSOs attacked on this site have a valid complaint."

None of those who are truly employed by the TSA (and are too cowardly to name themselves) who believe themselves to be under "attack" on this site have no grounds for a complaint as it is not the government that is "attacking" them.

Individuals have a right of free speech.

A government entity has no right to knowingly spread false information about citizens.

Anonymous said...

"If you can't be bothered to question the efficacy of those policies and procedures so as to hold TSA accountable to the Constitution and its use of taxpayer funds, that's on you."

The Constitution does not provide the right to fly. Follow the rules or stay home. Your freedom to make this choice is what the Constitution protects. Make your choice.

Anonymous said...

"Yet, again, screeners are supposed to give people options regarding disposition of contraband"

If contraband wasn't brought to the airport you wouldn't need options now would you?

GSOLTSO said...

Anon sez - "WEST - This comment section is eating replies, rather than allowing them to be submitted."

I have had no problems with it, and I have heard of no other complaints about this recently, but I will certainly notify Bob that it has happened for you. Thanks for letting us know about this.

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

"None of those who are truly employed by the TSA (and are too cowardly to name themselves) who believe themselves to be under "attack" on this site have no grounds for a complaint as it is not the government that is "attacking" them."

Your double negative proves the original poster's point. Nice job.

SSSS for Some Reason said...

Anonymous said...
The Constitution does not provide the right to fly. Follow the rules or stay home. Your freedom to make this choice is what the Constitution protects. Make your choice.

~~~~~~

First, the Constitution doesn't provide anything. It enumerates a set of pre-existing rights that the government is forbidden to limit.

THen, specifically to your comment, you are incorrect. The Right to travel is part of the Constitution. It is also enumerated by Statute, Common Law, and Case Law.

From the Constitution: ""The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

That means that just because something isn't listed in the Constitution it does not have similar protections. The Constitution is a set of limitations We the People place on the Government, not they upon us.

By United States Civil Ordinance: "...A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace." 49 US Code-Section 40103.

By Common Law: "...The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a
natural right." Schactman v. Dulles, 96 App DC 287.

Natural Right. That ties back in with the enumerated rights in the Constitution, the ones that shall not be disparaged by their specific absence in the document.

And then just one example of Case Law: "...The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

Hey, where have we heard that term before, Due Process? I know! In the 5th Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

The TSA is violating our Fifth Amendment Rights by exceeding the limited administrative search carve-out by treating all persons wishing to travel as guilty before the fact. A clear violation of both the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Bill of Rights.

So you were trying to tell us something about our Constitutional Rights regarding Air Travel? You can't make up the rules as you go along, if you can't follow the existing rules then maybe it is you who should stay home and leave the skies to the adults who understand how to balance the risks and benefits of something like air travel.

TSORon said...

Falcon One said...
[[This is NOT Theft. Every passenger is given the options to:

1. Check it in there checked baggage.

2. Take it out to their car.

3. Give it to someone who is not traveling with them.

4. Dispose of it themselves.

5. Voluntarily abandon it to the TSA.]]

100% accurate. We give people choices, its up to them to make one. They need never leave anything at a checkpoint, they always have the choice to take it home (out of the sterile area) instead. If a passengers circumstances prevent them from being able to exercise any one or all of the options available to them then they have no one to blame but themselves.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, West. The comment eating may have been network related.

Anonymous said...

The Constitution does not provide the right to fly. Follow the rules or stay home. Your freedom to make this choice is what the Constitution protects. Make your choice.

WRONG. The US Code of Laws establishes flying as a RIGHT. Here's the language:

"A citizen of the United States has a public RIGHT of transit through the navigable airspace."

That's from: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title49/html/USCODE-2011-title49-subtitleVII-partA-subparti-chap401-sec40103.htm

Do you think the US Code of Laws is somehow unConstitutional? Do you not understand that the US Constitution allows for unenumerated rights?

RB said...

Anonymous said..."If you can't be bothered to question the efficacy of those policies and procedures so as to hold TSA accountable to the Constitution and its use of taxpayer funds, that's on you."The Constitution does not provide the right to fly. Follow the rules or stay home. Your freedom to make this choice is what the Constitution protects. Make your choice.January 7, 2015 at 11:33 AM
......
The Constitution does set out rights but places limitations on the federal government. That being said the right to travel is well establish and even settled in the highest court of the land.

You really should make an attempt to understand these simple concepts before demonstrating your lack of knowledge.

Anonymous said...

"RB said...
Anonymous said..."If you can't be bothered to question the efficacy of those policies and procedures so as to hold TSA accountable to the Constitution and its use of taxpayer funds, that's on you."The Constitution does not provide the right to fly. Follow the rules or stay home. Your freedom to make this choice is what the Constitution protects. Make your choice.January 7, 2015 at 11:33 AM
......
The Constitution does set out rights but places limitations on the federal government. That being said the right to travel is well establish and even settled in the highest court of the land.

You really should make an attempt to understand these simple concepts before demonstrating your lack of knowledge.

January 9, 2015 at 7:39 PM"
---------------------------
Just as you should make an attempt to underdtand that the highest court in the land has ruled that Administrative Searches are perfectly within the bounds of the Constitution.
But then, understanding that would take away just about all of the arguments you and Susan like to espouse on a daily basis.

Susan Richart said...

Here's poor Ronnie living in his dream world again:

"We give people choices, its up to them to make one."

The TSA is supposed to give people choices. In fact, 90% of the time, an item is just confiscated with no choice offered.

screen shot/DHS OIG Statement

Anonymous said...

TSSRon agrees with EveryFalconOne and makes believe that arriving at the airport 2-3 hrs early just to deal with the ridiculous screening procedures of the TSA is normal and acceptable. Color me unsurprised.

Anonymous said...

"You really should make an attempt to understand these simple concepts before demonstrating your lack of knowledge."

Any first year law student knows your wrong. You really should study constitutional law before supposedly defending it.

SSSS for Some Reason said...

Anonymous said...Just as you should make an attempt to underdtand that the highest court in the land has ruled that Administrative Searches are perfectly within the bounds of the Constitution.
But then, understanding that would take away just about all of the arguments you and Susan like to espouse on a daily basis.

~~~~~~~~~~

And again you miss it. Completely.

The Administrative Search Carve-out allows, in certain locations and for certain reasons, the least restrictive, smallest interference in a citizen's travel. It isn't something you just say 'This is an Administrative Search' and you can get away with whatever you want.

The walk-through metal detectors and baggage x-rays met the definition of an Administrative Search because they met both the requirements set forth by the Courts. From the Davis Case that set up the airport searches: ",,, the court must make a dual determination: (1) whether the search serves a narrow but compelling administrative objective and (2) whether the intrusion is as “limited as is consistent with satisfaction of the administrative need that justifies it."

All subsequent case law has upheld the second test, the limited intrusion.

The current TSA procedures are *not* in compliance with the limited Administrative Search doctrines because they do not fit the dual test requirements.

All we need now is for some of the existing legal cases to get before a judge and we can slowly step down the TSA and their abuses of our Constitutionally Protected Rights.

Susan Richart said...

Anonymous wrote: "Just as you should make an attempt to underdtand that the highest court in the land has ruled that Administrative Searches are perfectly within the bounds of the Constitution."

There are many types of administrative searches.

The Supreme Court has NOT ruled on the validity of administrative searches as currently done by the TSA at checkpoints. Why? Because the TSA has made it nearly impossible to get court hearing on its procedures. Why? Could it possibly be because the TSA knows the searches could well be declared violative of the administrative search doctrine?

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Anonymous said...

TSanonymous said...

"Just as you should make an attempt to underdtand that the highest court in the land has ruled that Administrative Searches are perfectly within the bounds of the Constitution."

Who is arguing that? What is being disputed is that TSA searches do NOT fall within the bounds of Constitutionally allowed Administrative Searches. This has not yet been testing in court.

AirRifle said...

Hey, this is great information from the TSA. We have customers asking all the time, "how do I bring airsoft guns on a plane" when traveling to Atlanta. They don't know if they should pack it up, if it's OK to begin with, etc. This is good stuff. We're going to post this up in our store and put it on our website too. Thanks again for the very informative post!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said…
“WRONG. The US Code of Laws establishes flying as a RIGHT. Here's the language:”

Good quote, but you didn’t read it. Nowhere in that web page you linked did it say that you have the right to fly using someone else’s aircraft without some restrictions. In fact it does not say that you have unrestricted right to fly at all. Yet the other commenter is also correct, neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights says anything about flying.

In fact, the page you quoted says VERY clearly that the government is REQUIRED to regulate the airspace over our nation, and everything in it. So basically your argument falls apart on its face when you really look at it. Too bad you didn’t before hitting “send”.

TSORon said...

Susan Richart said...
[[The TSA is supposed to give people choices. In fact, 90% of the time, an item is just confiscated with no choice offered.]]

Hmmm Sue, I spend a lot more time at the airport than you do and I believe your statement is in any way accurate. But I have an open mind, why don’t you provide us with a link that supports your claim? An unbiased site would be best, but we can weigh your evidence keeping in mind the source even if you cant find a reputable source. I wont hold my breath, promise.

TSORon said...

Anonymous said …
[[Any first year law student knows your wrong. You really should study constitutional law before supposedly defending it.]]

Obviously you are not a first year law student.

http://openjurist.org/482/f2d/893/united-states-v-davis
https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/US/520/520.US.305.96-126.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/search/display.html?terms=%22administrative%20search%22&url=/supct/html/99-1030.ZO.html
**http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1265662.html**
This one is 100% on topic and very very clear. Maybe if you were a first year law student…

Anonymous said...

"Good quote, but you didn’t read it. Nowhere in that web page you linked did it say that you have the right to fly using someone else’s aircraft without some restrictions. In fact it does not say that you have unrestricted right to fly at all. Yet the other commenter is also correct, neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights says anything about flying.

In fact, the page you quoted says VERY clearly that the government is REQUIRED to regulate the airspace over our nation, and everything in it. So basically your argument falls apart on its face when you really look at it. Too bad you didn’t before hitting “send”.


In your haste to post what you likely believed is a clever reply, you did not comprehend the most important part of what I linked: the word 'right.' The law does not use the word 'privilege.' Certainly, the right to fly is subject to restrictions, but so is each right in the Bill of Rights. What I linked is clear legal acknowledgment that flying is a right and, thus, my argument stands.

You said: "Nowhere in that web page you linked did it say that you have the right to fly using someone else’s aircraft without some restrictions."

Of what relevance is ownership of the plane? I have the right to travel by air only if it is in my own plane? Do you think that people who are wealthy enough to own a plane have rights that the less wealthy people do not? If so, how classist of you--and how little you know about 'rights.'

You said: "Yet the other commenter is also correct, neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights says anything about flying."

You mean SSSS's January 8 comment? It is excellent and worth a re-read. Here's a decent article to help you further educate yourself: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/12/13/you-dont-have-constitutional-rights/.

Anonymous said...

Again, TSSRon insults a fellow commenter and yet his comments are approved.

Who approved Ron's comments, blotter team?

TSORon said...

Anonymous said...
[[Again, TSSRon insults a fellow commenter and yet his comments are approved.]]

Really? I insulted someone in this thread? Please, show us where. I went through and re-read all my posts and none of them contain an insult. Maybe your understanding of the term is different than everyone elses.

Susan Richart said...

Ronnie wrote: "Hmmm Sue, I spend a lot more time at the airport than you do and I believe your statement is in any way accurate. But I have an open mind, why don’t you provide us with a link that supports your claim? An unbiased site would be best, but we can weigh your evidence keeping in mind the source even if you cant find a reputable source. I wont hold my breath, promise."

You know full well, Ronnie, that there are no articles on this subject. What gives my response credenceknowing full well that if every screener spent time giving the "options" spiel, the lines would slow down to a crawl and throughput would fall below acceptable levels. In order to avoid that, screeners take items from passengers and toss them in the trash, no questions asked.

I would ask for a show of hands on how many readers have seen/heard the spiel, but I also know that some unscrupulous screeners would chime in so I won't ask the question.

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Anonymous said...

No, TSSRon. Your tone, attitude, and words in this comment thread, along with your history of insulting, belittling, and lying to the American public on this blotter is well known and fits the definition of "insult."

TSORon said...

Susan Richart said...
[[You know full well, Ronnie, that there are no articles on this subject.]]

Yes, I knew that. It’s the reason I promised to not hold my breath. So, you quote a statistic that you admit cannot be substantiated, and you expect the flying public to take it on faith that you, an obviously biased person, are correct and I, a professional in the field, am not? Do you see the logic failure there? I’m guessing not.