Friday, July 24, 2015

TSA Week in Review: 38 Loaded Firearms, Hatchets, Flares, Tomahawk, Propane Tanks and More


Loaded Firearm.
41 Firearms Discovered Over the Last Eight Days – Of the 41 firearms discovered, 38 were loaded and 16 had a round chambered. The firearm pictured above was discovered in a carry on bag at HOU.
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.

Inert Grenades
Five inert/replica grenades were discovered this week in both carry-on and checked bags. Clockwise from top left, the grenades we discovered at: Gulfport (GPT), Glacier Park (FCA), Las Vegas (LAS), Spokane (GEG) and Guam (GUM).
Artfully Concealed Prohibited Items – Artfully concealed is a term used to describe an item that is intentionally hidden. It could be anything from a knife sewn into the lining of a bag to a sword hidden inside of a walking cane. If a concealed prohibited item is discovered in your bag or on your body, you could be cited and possibly arrested by law enforcement. Here is an example from this week where an artfully concealed item was discovered by our officers
Cane Sword
A cane sword was discovered at LaGuardia (LGA).
Miscellaneous Prohibited Items – In addition to all of the other prohibited items we find weekly, 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.
Items discovered in traveler's bag at BWI.
A traveler at Baltimore (BWI) had the following items in his carry-on bag: two smoke bombs, 12 bottle rockets, three paracord cutters, four knives, a hatchet, a folding saw and a credit card knife.
Propane Tanks
Two propane tanks (13.1 and 8 ounce) were discovered this week in separate incidents at San Diego (SAN). Propane is prohibited in both carry-on and checked bags.
Boating Flares
A traveler at Albany (ALB) packed four boating flares in his carry-on bag. Flares are prohibited in both carry-on and checked bags.
A jawbone tomahawk and an inert pineapple grenade.
A jawbone tomahawk and an inert pineapple grenade were discovered in a carry-on bag at Las Vegas (LAS). The grenade is also pictured above with other grenades.
Fireworks
Fireworks discovered this week in checked bags. L-R - Items discovered at Baltimore (BWI), LaGuardia (LGA) and Omaha (OMA).
Knives, throwing stars, and a hatchet.
Counterclockwise from top, items discovered at: EWR, BDL, BDL, BOI, JAX, IAH, AZO, SFO, SNA, DEN, JAX, PNS, PHL, PHX, ORD, ORD and OAK.
Stun Guns - 24 stun guns were discovered in carry-on bags this week around the nation. Four were discovered at Las Vegas (LAS), two at Dallas Love (DAL), two at Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW), two at Eugene (EUG), two at Memphis (MEM) and the remainder were discovered at Albuquerque (ABQ), Cleveland (CLE), Houston Intercontinental (IAH), Huntsville (HSV), Manchester (MHT), Ontario (ONT), Orange County (SNA), Portland (PDX), Rafael Hernandez (BQN), Rochester (ROC), Salt Lake City (SLC) and San Francisco (SFO).

Ammunition
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. The ammo pictured above was discovered in a carry-on bag at IAH.
Loaded firearms discovered in carry-on bags.
Clockwise from top left, firearms discovered in carry-on bags at: ANC, LAS, IAH, ATL and TYS.

Loaded firearms discovered in carry-on bags.
Clockwise from top left, firearms discovered in carry-on bags at: CVG, ATL, SFO, RSW and PDX.





Table for discovered firearms in carry-on bags list
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 $11,000. 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 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.


Read our 2014 Year in Review post! If you haven’t read them yet, make sure you check out our year in review posts for 2011, 2012 and 2013.

Follow @TSA on Twitter and Instagram!

Bob Burns
TSA Social Media Team

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

46 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yawn.

How many passengers harassed for filming?

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...

What is the purpose of this weekly post?

CliffOnTheRoad said...

On a lighter note, I never recall reading a tomahawk was prohibited, but I suppose scalping might make a come back.

More seriously, The below web site reporting TSA screening failures MIGHT be a biased or political site, but the data AND THE COMMENTS are enlightening.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/longer-airport-lines-likely-as-tsa-tries-to-plug-security-holes-120117.html

What is disappointing is agencies keep their reports private, sometimes including the TSA citing security concerns. Even government money given to cities does not always become public, hence buying a tank to protect our homeland. Is there abuse with purchases because local governments can get away with it?

The $85 Precheck program, to save oneself from having to remove their shoes, should be a free "we checked you previous dozen vacation trips."

Susan Richart said...

Hey, Bob, where's the statement that the TSA allegedly put out after the screener at MSY called the cops on a teenager who was fully within his rights to have his and his father's patdowns filmed? We read this:

"A TSA agent is under investigation for calling the police on a teenager who was filming the agent during a pat-down.......

TSA put out a statement after the video was released saying the agent has been reassigned until their investigation is complete"

http://wn.ktvu.com/story/29618200/tsa-agent-under-investigation-after-denying-teen-right-to-film-pat-down

However, an internet search doesn't find that alleged statement. Do you write these statements and then just store them away without distributing them to the media?

screenshot/DHS OIG statement

David Gayle said...

JAIL EM.

SSSS for Some Reason said...

"...Five inert/replica grenades were discovered this week "

No.

Three inert grenades were found, plus one sight gag made out of plastic, and one perfume bottle that is less than three ounces so as long as it was in the magic zippy bag should have been allowed to fly.


".. three paracord cutters,"

Really? String is now a prohibited item?

You guys aren't even trying anymore, are you?

Anonymous said...

SSSS for Some Reason said...
"...Five inert/replica grenades were discovered this week "

No.

Three inert grenades were found, plus one sight gag made out of plastic, and one perfume bottle that is less than three ounces so as long as it was in the magic zippy bag should have been allowed to fly.


".. three paracord cutters,"

Really? String is now a prohibited item?

You guys aren't even trying anymore, are you?

sometimes the nay Sayers just crack me up. You clearly read what you want to read and insert thoughts to make it sound logical in your own mind. No wonder you are so upset with TSA.
A replica is a replica is a replica. At 38,000 feet, they are all the same and yes, even you would bow down to someone who is holding an "inert replica" and making threats to take over a plane. There is a reason that even on the ground even fake looking bombs are handled by the bomb squad. Because you ALWAYS error on the side of caution. Why would you chance it? But I know you know this. You for some reason feel it is necessary to come on here and argue/debate/question the logical. But sadly, you just make yourself look...well, not in the best light. I'm just wondering, if I came to your house broke in in the middle of the night (not a threat, only hypothetical)and I had in my hand and "inert replica" grenade, what would you do? I can answer that for you. You would panic, do any thing you are asked to do, give me all that I asked for and then call the police. Why? Its only a replica...

and BTW, nowhere did anyone say "string" was prohibited. They didn't even mention string. Why did you read string? agenda perhaps?

Anonymous said...

Are you going to write about the guy in Fort Worth who walked directly through the screening area without being checked at all and got onto a plane without even a boarding pass?

How did he get through the screening area without interacting with any of the dozen or more screeners in that area?

Anonymous said...

SSSS--"Two smoke bombs, 12 bottle rockets, three paracord cutters, four knives, a hatchet, a folding saw and a credit card knife," but you only saw fit to mention the 3 paracord cutters. I think in general that the overall message of what's acceptable in carry-on luggage did not reach this passenger at BWI. So what would you do spread the word that all that stuff he/she had in their carry-on bag isn't acceptable? I don't think that attacking the TSA blog is working though.

SSSS for Some Reason said...

Bold Posting Intern Said.... "and BTW, nowhere did anyone say "string" was prohibited. They didn't even mention string. Why did you read string? agenda perhaps?"

Followed by another Anonymous saying "...but you only saw fit to mention the 3 paracord cutters."

Scroll back up. Look at the picture. It is a piece of yellow plastic. Wrapped very clearly in string. Sure, it sounds cool because its 'paracord.' But what is paracord? String.

The TSA is now prohibiting string from flying.

It's not on the TSA's list of prohibited items so how was the passenger at BWI supposed to know he shouldn't have it in his luggage?

Anonymous said...

The TSA is doing a favor for the passenger with the replica grenade by confiscating it. If a passenger pulls out a grenade, real or fake, the other passengers are going to mob the guy and beat him or her senseless. The airlines appreciate it too since they wouldn't have to divert the plane.

Anonymous said...

You forgot the words realistic looking. A tiny cologne bottle well below the size of a real grenade is not realistic looking.

The TSA still confiscated the bottle and enlarged the photo to make it look like the bottle was the size of a real grenade. this is the TSA lying to the public.

And yes, the total fluid size was less than 3.4oz.

Anonymous said...

A replica is a replica is a replica.
--
And a glass perfume bottle is NOT a replica, even though the TSA keeps crowing about them being "realistic replicas" when you, I, And they know they're not.

Anonymous said...

"... if I came to your house broke in in the middle of the night (not a threat, only hypothetical)and I had in my hand and "inert replica" grenade, what would you do? "

What would I do? I would shoot you dead for breaking into my house and threatening my family.

A more accurate question, not that you care about accuracy or even correctness in any way, would be to ask why passengers would freak out on a plane if somebody jumped up and screamed do what I say or I'll pull the pin. A wanna-be terrorist holding a two inch perfume bottle is going to look kinda silly standing there threatening to smell us to death.

No my dear Bold Posting Intern, you projecting your fears onto others isn't a suitable case for the silliness of the TSA. Just because you would loose your proverbial sh*t doesn't mean the rest of us would. Your inability to tell the obviously fake from possible real is your problem that you should seek help for. If you can tell the difference between a cologne bottle and an explosive the maybe it is you that should stay home, stay away from airplanes and let the rest of the adults go about the business of flying.

Anonymous said...

Paracord--short for parachute cord, the stuff that keeps you connected to the nylon of the parachute should you need it to save your life. I knew that because I'm a retired AF pilot and have walked out to many an aircraft with "paracord" strapped to my back. Used the stuff for all kinds of gadgets while at survival school. Not really important in this case though, since it was the sharp blade on the "plastic thing" that was probably the reason they did not allow this item to fly. Just my guess since I wasn't there, just like you weren't there either. Before you comment on the size of the blade, remember the size of the blades used on 9/11. I visited the memorial in NY last month--teared up several times. They let me in free because I'm a retiree. I recommend you take the time and money to go visit it. No, not an intern, not hardly.

Mike Toreno said...

"The TSA is doing a favor for the passenger with the replica grenade by confiscating it. If a passenger pulls out a grenade, real or fake, the other passengers are going to mob the guy and beat him or her senseless. The airlines appreciate it too since they wouldn't have to divert the plane."

95 "inert grenades flew last week without incident.

RB said...

To the several comments about the paracord. It's not the line that TSA was concerned about but the tiny little line cutter on the edge of the plastic line holder. If you look at the top left image you csn see the notched shaped area tat contains the cutting blade. Hardly a threat to anything but the paracord. Just another made up threat by TSA and an example of why nothing done by TSA can be taken seriously. TSA is nothing other than a bad joke.

Anonymous said...

"Jail them" for what, David? Most of the time, they haven't committed a crime and continue on their flight.

SSSS for Some Reason said...

"...since it was the sharp blade on the "plastic thing""

And that 'sharp blade' is smaller than the three sharp blades in my disposable razor. I know because i have one of these 'plastic things.'

Thank you for your service to this country, by the way.

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 sacrificed for 20+ have to take their bloody shoes and belts off!! it's pretty clear that TSA doesn't understand risk assessment or risk-based anything, much less security.

Anonymous said...

"... Before you comment on the size of the blade, remember the size of the blades used on 9/11."

Look over here! Terrorists! I call upon the ghosts of the September 11th victims to distract you from something that would be uncomfortable to discuss because I don't have a reasonable answer to the quetsion.

The size of the blades used on September 11th were considerably larger than the one inch sliver of sharp in these paracord tools. The size of the blade on the paracord cutter is smaller than the blades in a typical disposable razor. If a disposable razor is allowed, why wouldn't this be allowed?

Anonymous said...

Never watched Macgyver, did you? Thanks TSA guys for enduring this every week. And I thought my job was challenging at times.

Anonymous said...

SSSS for Some Reason said...
Bold Posting Intern Said.... "and BTW, nowhere did anyone say "string" was prohibited. They didn't even mention string. Why did you read string? agenda perhaps?"

Followed by another Anonymous saying "...but you only saw fit to mention the 3 paracord cutters."

Scroll back up. Look at the picture. It is a piece of yellow plastic. Wrapped very clearly in string. Sure, it sounds cool because its 'paracord.' But what is paracord? String.

The TSA is now prohibiting string from flying.

It's not on the TSA's list of prohibited items so how was the passenger at BWI supposed to know he shouldn't have it in his luggage?

Paracord CUTTER, not paracord. maybe you missed that part...more than once.
How should someone know they shouldn't have a paracord cutter on a plane? My guess would be common sense should dictate. Or, when in doubt, leave it out.
I'm not saying I agree with a paracord cutter being prohibited, mostly I'm saying you shouldn't say string is banned when clearly nothing was ever said or insinuated that TSA is banning string. You shouldn't make things up.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous Mike Toreno said...
"The TSA is doing a favor for the passenger with the replica grenade by confiscating it. If a passenger pulls out a grenade, real or fake, the other passengers are going to mob the guy and beat him or her senseless. The airlines appreciate it too since they wouldn't have to divert the plane."

Mike, you are using logic and common sense here. You will never fit in. Sadly, so few here do the same.

Anonymous said...

To those who are fixated on the paracord cutter - The passenger had a myriad of prohibited objects in his bag.
"A traveler at Baltimore (BWI) had the following items in his carry-on bag: two smoke bombs, 12 bottle rockets, three paracord cutters, four knives, a hatchet, a folding saw and a credit card knife."
The cutters were listed among his other items. They were unique enough to warrant a mention. At the point where all this stuff was discovered chances are that the passenger wasn't going to be flying. He may well have been given back any or all of those items depending on the legality of the items in question in the jurisdiction he was in.

Mike Toreno said...

Clerk TSA Anonymous, the part of my post that you quoted was me quoting you. What I was saying in response was that 95 "inert grenades" - that is, hunks of metal - flew without incident.

. said...

Never watched Macgyver, did you?
--
So, you're saying airport security should be based on works of fiction? That explains a lot:/

Anonymous said...

"...To those who are fixated on the paracord cutter - The passenger had a myriad of prohibited objects in his bag. "

That's fine. But that also weakens the TSA's presentation. This guy had all this other stuff in his bag so lets just take pictures of EVERYTHING! and share. The end result is the TSA looks (more) foolish for trying to say string is prohibited from flying.

And the people trying to say 'cutter' is the key... bull crap. That little bit of sharp is nothing, smaller than a disposable razor and there are millions of those flying right now.

RB said...

said...
Never watched Macgyver, did you?
--
So, you're saying airport security should be based on works of fiction? That explains a lot:/

August 4, 2015 at 1:04 PM
..................
It's pretty clear that TSA security has been based on fiction all along.

Explosive water? Would make you laugh if it wasn't so sad.

Anonymous said...

I can appreciate keeping realistic-looking replicas of firearms and grenades off of planes. But it makes no sense for TSA to include these in the weekly blotter postings. Why, it's almost like the purpose of the blotter posts - which are at this point the only things this misbegotten blog does - is to try to make people think there are ravenous hordes of terrorists trying to take down planes every day, when in fact each and every item shown, each and every week, was carried by someone stupid, rather than someone intending anyone harm. Shameful.

JCK said...

I think it's RB saying:
"Explosive water? Would make you laugh if it wasn't so sad."

Google "clear explosive liquid"
Here's just a couple links discussing them as they relate to air travel.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/liquid-explosives.htm
http://www.slideshare.net/Manjularma/liquid-explosive

JCK said...

Showing pictures of confiscated goods doesn't add much value if the back story isn't shared as well.

How many people are trying to carry on because they think their conceal carry license allows them?
How many people are trying to make a case for abuse of 2nd amendment rights?
How many guns are carried by people who are otherwise authorized but didn't follow proper procedure?
How many people are just plane stupid? Like d'oh, "I can't carry a gun onto an airplane!? Since when did this happen!?"

Anonymous said...

A person with a paracord cutter will never take over a plane.

Anonymous said...

I did, and no one in reality is MacGyver.

Anonymous said...

I bet if he let the screeners confiscate his private property, and if local law enforcement didn't detain him for local laws, he caught his flight.

Anonymous said...

What would I do? I would shoot you dead for breaking into my house and threatening my family.

threatening your family? With what, a fake grenade? Thanks for proving my point.
As you know, house does not give the home owner the OK to shoot and kill the person. One must feel their life or the life of another is in danger. So the only threat would be the inert, replica, perfume bottle . So in your house its a threat but on a plane it isn't? You need to be consistant here.

Anonymous said...

No my dear Bold Posting Intern, you projecting your fears onto others isn't a suitable case for the silliness of the TSA. Just because you would loose your proverbial sh*t doesn't mean the rest of us would. However, many if not most would. You of course would never be fooled by a fake replica item. Although you said you would shoot me dead in your house for threatening you with one. Your inability to tell the obviously fake from possible real is your problem that you should seek help for. you are willing to risk the life of you loved ones on your ability to tell the difference between real and fake? If so, you are far batter than any bomb detection officer I have ever seen. Even they ALWAYS error on the side of caution. Perhaps you have a super power they don't have. If you can't tell the difference between a cologne bottle and an explosive then maybe it is you that should stay home, stay away from airplanes and let the rest of the adults go about the business of flying. when it comes to saving lives, I would always error on the side of caution. Its just so easy to remove the item and then nobody has to worry about GUESSING wrong. From 30 rows away, before you have a chance to convince everyone it is a fake, panic has set it. I assume you can tell a real from a fake at a distance of up to 30 rows while everyone else is in full panic mode. Come on, really?

RB said...

JCK said...
I think it's RB saying:
"Explosive water? Would make you laugh if it wasn't so sad."

Google "clear explosive liquid"
Here's just a couple links discussing them as they relate to air travel.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/liquid-explosives.htm
http://www.slideshare.net/Manjularma/liquid-explosive

August 9, 2015 at 8:04 AM
...............
OK, for the sake of argument lets say that liquid explosives are a real threat.

Then why does TSA just toss these highly volatile, explosive liquids in common trash right at the checkpoint?

We already know that single part liquid explosives are extremely unstable and only need to be knocked about to go off and we know that mixed liquid explosives need laboratory conditions to mix them without detonation so doing anything with them in an aircraft lavatory just isn't going to happen.

Answering my own question, TSA tosses liquids into common trash bins because they know these items are not dangerous.

Only idiots would toss dangerous liquids into trash bins right where people are lined up.

RB said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
What would I do? I would shoot you dead for breaking into my house and threatening my family.

threatening your family? With what, a fake grenade? Thanks for proving my point.
As you know, house does not give the home owner the OK to shoot and kill the person. One must feel their life or the life of another is in danger. So the only threat would be the inert, replica, perfume bottle . So in your house its a threat but on a plane it isn't? You need to be consistant here.


August 10, 2015 at 10:08 A

....................
There you go again Bold Blotter Intern, getting it wrong again.

RB said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
No my dear Bold Posting Intern, you projecting your fears onto others isn't a suitable case for the silliness of the TSA. Just because you would loose your proverbial sh*t doesn't mean the rest of us would. However, many if not most would. You of course would never be fooled by a fake replica item. Although you said you would shoot me dead in your house for threatening you with one. Your inability to tell the obviously fake from possible real is your problem that you should seek help for. you are willing to risk the life of you loved ones on your ability to tell the difference between real and fake? If so, you are far batter than any bomb detection officer I have ever seen. Even they ALWAYS error on the side of caution. Perhaps you have a super power they don't have. If you can't tell the difference between a cologne bottle and an explosive then maybe it is you that should stay home, stay away from airplanes and let the rest of the adults go about the business of flying. when it comes to saving lives, I would always error on the side of caution. Its just so easy to remove the item and then nobody has to worry about GUESSING wrong. From 30 rows away, before you have a chance to convince everyone it is a fake, panic has set it. I assume you can tell a real from a fake at a distance of up to 30 rows while everyone else is in full panic mode. Come on, really?

August 10, 2015 at 10:20 AM+

............
I'm pretty sure that I could tell a grenade shaped object that only holds 3 teaspoons of liquid is not a threat and not a real or realistic replica of a grenade.

Real or Realistic Replica is the key to this whole discussion.

Little one inch guns on a doll, plastic hammers, an embossed revolver on a purse, and things like that do not fits TSA's definition of a threat item.

So the real question is why are TSA employees so poorly trained that they don't understand TSA's own terms.

TSA is an overall failure.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Bold TSApologist, really. Your willingness to panic and hand over your freedoms to the likes of the TSA does not mean anyone else will panic nor does it mean that anyone else is willing to hand over their freedoms.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
What would I do? I would shoot you dead for breaking into my house and threatening my family.

threatening your family? With what, a fake grenade? Thanks for proving my point.
As you know, house does not give the home owner the OK to shoot and kill the person. One must feel their life or the life of another is in danger. So the only threat would be the inert, replica, perfume bottle . So in your house its a threat but on a plane it isn't? You need to be consistant here.

~~~~~~~~~~

I am shooting you dead because you have broken into my house. The fact that you have a perfume bottle in your hand is of no concern to me.

Before you try to school others on consistency you should learn some yourself.

SSSS for Some Reason said...

"... Its just so easy to remove the item and then nobody has to worry about GUESSING wrong. "

Why would I have to guess? The TSA is supposed to be the last and best defense against terrorists? So if you are on the plane and pulling a small bottle out of your bag aren't I to assume that the TSA did their job and that little two inch round looking thing is not a threat to me or anyone else on the flight? Why would panic set in if the TSA was doing their job.... or are you saying that even with the TSA we the travelling public assume the TSA ISN"T doing a good job and that someone could have smuggled a two inch grenade onto a flight?

We are supposed to trust the TSA to do a good job and stop the bad things but if we see a replica bad thing on a flight we are going to freak out because bad things on a plane!
Weren't you just saying something about consistency in an argument?

Anonymous said...

One could argue that your B&E of an occupied home was threat enough. In many states, the break in is enough to get a shooting deemed "justifiable homicide." But you're not concerned with facts, just with convincing yourself that you're right.

Anonymous said...

"... you are willing to risk the life of you loved ones on your ability to tell the difference between real and fake?"

Yes. I am. I do so everyday. I am an adult capable of evaluating the risk-reward equation. If the reward outweighs the risks then I take action. Its a simple thing, really. It doesn't require anyone to freak out from 30 rows away because some 'other' might have what looks like something that might possibly be something that is bad.

In regards to travel by air I understand that the odds of someone trying to do harm to the aircraft or the people inside of it are very, very low. Like one in millions. I would happily fly on any aircraft from any airline that had pre-September 11 security operations. I would happily fly on any aircraft that had pre-1972 security operations. The number people trying to do harm to an aircraft is incredibly small. And the number of those people who would be stopped by the TSA is zero. And I fly anyway because the odds are in my favor.