Friday, July 31, 2015

TSA Week in Review: 62 Firearms, 12 Cans of Bear Mace and More



Loaded Firearm
62 Firearms Discovered This Week – Of the 62 firearms discovered, 54 were loaded and 25 had a round chambered. The firearm above was discovered in a carry-on bag at ATL.

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.
 

Grenades
Three inert/replica grenades were discovered this week. Two were discovered in checked bags at Nashville (BNA) and Milwaukee (MKE) (Pictured) and one was discovered in a carry-on bag at Dallas (DAL). A spent smoke grenade (Pictured) was discovered in a checked bag at Newark (EWR).

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.

Bear Mace
Twelve cans of bear mace were discovered this week in carry-on bags around the nation. Eight were discovered at Anchorage (ANC), two at Billings (BIL) and the remainder at Oakland (OAK) and Seattle (SEA). Bear repellent is prohibited in the cabin of an aircraft. You can pack bear repellent in your checked bag if the volume is less than four ounces and if it has less than a two percent active ingredient of either CS or CN. Most bear repellents exceed these limitations.
Camping fuel.
Four canisters of propane were discovered in carry-on bags in two separate incidents at Anchorage (ANC) this week. Propane is prohibited from both carry-on and checked baggage.

Knives and throwing stars.
Counterclockwise from the top, these items were discovered at: DAL, PHX, TVC, SJC, ONT, PHX, DAL, DEN, RDU, BUF, BZN and ATL
Stun Guns - 26 stun guns were discovered this week in carry-on bags around the nation. Two were discovered at  Chattanooga (CHA), two at Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW), two at Las Vegas (LAS), two at Sacramento (SMF), two at Salt Lake City (SLC), and the remainder were discovered at Albuquerque (ABQ), Atlanta (ATL), Baltimore (BWI), Charleston (CHS), Chicago O'Hare (ORD), Houston Intercontinental (IAH), Killeen (GRK), Memphis (MEM), Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP), Oakland (OAK), Phoenix (PHX),  Portland (PDX), Reno (RNO), San Francisco (SFO), Seattle (SEA), and Tallahassee (TLH). 

Loaded firearms.
Clockwise from the top left, these firearms were discovered in carry-on bags at: ATL, UNV, ATL, BNA, LIT and SMF
Loaded firearms.
Clockwise from the top left, these firearms were discovered in carry-on bags at: SBN, IAH, PIT, TPA, MEM and JAN

Loaded firearms.
Top to bottom these firearms were discovered in carry-on bags at: SAT, SAT and SNA


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.

54 comments:

Kathy Richardson said...

Anyone who ever complains about the slight delay to go though the TSA clearing or has the nerve to not treat these employees with the most respect and pleasant demeanor that they can manage no matter how long they have been traveling, need to be reading this weekly review, to find out exactly what kind of people we are traveling with. Where have they been? What could they possibly be thinking? I felt really bad when I forgot that I had the last swallow in the bottom in the bottom in my water bottle since my International flight was flight #3, and water was permitted for domestic flights, but, I was permitted to just finish the water, with a laugh and a good wish for the rest of my travels.

RB said...

TSA says thst finding guns happens all to often and that's why it is talked about on the blog.

Well based on the number of guns found this week perhaps TSA needs to be doing something else than addressing this on a blog where the readership is in decline.

TSA, ineffective in every task.

Susan Richart said...

Kathy Richardson, since when has water in a bottle been allowed on a domestic flight? Methinks you are just making things up. But if you did feel "really bad," perhaps you need to get a life and find other things to feel "really bad" about, such a little kids going hungry - something that really matters.

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?

Anonymous said...

After following this for some time, one has to beg the question; what happens to the confiscated firearms? Many of these are rather pricey ($500+/-) and one would think legally reselling confiscated firearms might be a revenue stream for law enforcement. I suspect there are a few of these folks that made a genuine mistake and deserve the opportunity to recover, but the balance -and especially some of the higher end stuff from the major manufacturers- might fetch a decent value and help offset the costs to find them.

Anonymous said...

Kathy Richardson said...
Anyone who ever complains about the slight delay to go though the TSA clearing or has the nerve to not treat these employees with the most respect and pleasant demeanor that they can manage no matter how long they have been traveling, need to be reading this weekly review, to find out exactly what kind of people we are traveling with. Where have they been? What could they possibly be thinking? I felt really bad when I forgot that I had the last swallow in the bottom in the bottom in my water bottle since my International flight was flight #3, and water was permitted for domestic flights, but, I was permitted to just finish the water, with a laugh and a good wish for the rest of my travels.


July 31, 2015 at 8:34 PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
clearly, Kathy, you have not been paying attention. 1) no one is complaining about the delays. many complain about the senselessness of many policies, the lack of transparency, the arbitrary nature of decisions made at checkpoints, the obvious lack of thought put into many of the policies, the simple fact that none of the TSA's security theatre makes us even a little bit safer, and many other issues regarding TSA. delay is not the issue - senseless and unhelpful delay without justification is the issue. 2) multiply everything that scares you in this weekly blog by 20 and rest assured that it is on a plane with you. they miss 95% of what is attempted. please note - no planes are falling from the sky, and no one has been hurt or killed, despite TSA having a similar record since 2001. the "kinds of people we are traveling with" have not, thus far, been terrorists or dangerous in any way, despite TSA's obvious inadequacy.

Anonymous said...

Kathy, never mind what Susan says. She is an angry ex-TSA employee who is still mad at her ex-employer. There is nothing any can say or do that makes her happy. I'm sure TSA employees appreciate your kind words.

RB said...

Anonymous said...
After following this for some time, one has to beg the question; what happens to the confiscated firearms? Many of these are rather pricey ($500+/-) and one would think legally reselling confiscated firearms might be a revenue stream for law enforcement. I suspect there are a few of these folks that made a genuine mistake and deserve the opportunity to recover, but the balance -and especially some of the higher end stuff from the major manufacturers- might fetch a decent value and help offset the costs to find them.

August 3, 2015 at 7:16 AM
................
How much of the confiscated items are pocketed by TSA employees? What controls are in place that documents the history of each and every items that TSA confiscates at their checkpoints?

And why won't TSA answer the long standing question of why confiscated LGA's are tossed in common trash bins right at the checkpoints instead of being treated as potential explosives?

Aren't LGA's taken because they could be weapons? Yet TSA treats these items as completely harmless which begs the question, does TSA already know that these LGA's are actually harmless and has no good reason to continue the confiscation of these items?

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.

RB said...

Kathy Richardson said...
Anyone who ever complains about the slight delay to go though the TSA clearing or has the nerve to not treat these employees with the most respect and pleasant demeanor that they can manage no matter how long they have been traveling, need to be reading this weekly review, to find out exactly what kind of people we are traveling with. Where have they been? What could they possibly be thinking? I felt really bad when I forgot that I had the last swallow in the bottom in the bottom in my water bottle since my International flight was flight #3, and water was permitted for domestic flights, but, I was permitted to just finish the water, with a laugh and a good wish for the rest of my travels.

July 31, 2015 at 8:34 PM

...............
Slight delay? Just how often do you fly and if you fly is it from a large airport? I cleared security at MIA just this past Saturday and it was not a slight delay. The regular security lines was backuped and moving very slowly. Of course the good news was that no one was using the Pre Check line so those TSA screeners were standing around twiddling their fingers, not to mention the groups of TSA screeners out in the secure part of the terminal harassing people who had already cleared security. Not just one or two screeners but groups of 2 and e screeners wandering around. Why aren't these people at the checkpoints helping to clear the backlog of people standing in the TSA security lines?

I'm wiling to bet that you are either another stealth TSA employee or family member of a TSA employee who has very little direct experience with TSA and the shenanigans they pull at airports.

I'll give TSA employees respect when they earn some.


Anonymous said...

Right back at you RB--approximately how many times a year do you fly? I think that's a fair question. Is it just Miami or the whole system that's lengthy?

Anonymous said...

clearly, Kathy, you have not been paying attention. 1) no one is complaining about the delays. many complain about the senselessness of many policies, the lack of transparency, the arbitrary nature of decisions made at checkpoints, the obvious lack of thought put into many of the policies, the simple fact that none of the TSA's security theatre makes us even a little bit safer, really? and many other issues regarding TSA. delay is not the issue - senseless and unhelpful delay without justification is the issue. 2) multiply everything that scares you in this weekly blog by 20 and rest assured that it is on a plane with you. they miss 95% of what is attempted based on internal tests designed to fail. Meaningless results. please note - no planes are falling from the sky, thanks TSA for a 100% success rate and no one has been hurt or killed, thanks TSA for a 100% success rate despite TSA having a similar record since 2001. the "kinds of people we are traveling with" have not, thus far ( your words not mine), been terrorists or dangerous in any way do you know this? how could you possibly know this, despite TSA's obvious inadequacy

nothing this person says can be substantiated. They say no one has been a terrorist "yet". So do we ignore security and let another 3000 people die? Keep in mind, TSA's job IS NOT to find terrorist. It is to keep threat items off of planes. Had TSA stopped the hijackers on 9/11 and taken the box cutters, nobody would have known the largest terror attack ever was just prevented. For all we know, there have been dozens of terror attacks planned and prevented by TSA. There is just no way to say they have failed. As for the test results. They are completely meaningless. They are designed to exploit known weaknesses in TSA systems. If you don't test your weaknesses, how do you ever fix them.

Anonymous said...

And why won't TSA answer the long standing question of why confiscated LGA's are tossed in common trash bins right at the checkpoints instead of being treated as potential explosives?

Aren't LGA's taken because they could be weapons? Yet TSA treats these items as completely harmless which begs the question, does TSA already know that these LGA's are actually harmless and has no good reason to continue the confiscation of these items?

im guessing this has been answered about 20 times. Look back at old post for your answer.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
And why won't TSA answer the long standing question of why confiscated LGA's are tossed in common trash bins right at the checkpoints instead of being treated as potential explosives?

Aren't LGA's taken because they could be weapons? Yet TSA treats these items as completely harmless which begs the question, does TSA already know that these LGA's are actually harmless and has no good reason to continue the confiscation of these items?

im guessing this has been answered about 20 times. Look back at old post for your answer.

I just spent the last hour going back through the last year's worth of posts and comments.... the question hasn't been answered. Your guess is wrong.

If that bottle of water is so dangerous it can't go through security but safe enough to just throw away in a regular bin... why do we have the TSA?

Anonymous said...

The "common" LGAs that are disposed of are first tested. There are hundreds of camera all over the place, if someone takes something illegally, it will be caught via camera.
LGA's that are tossed in the garbage after they are voluntarily surrendered ( Its an option, they are not taking them away from you) it is chemically tested to make sure not an explosive, then thrown away. If it is something with the potential to cause a fire or an explosion ( like an aerosol) it is not place in the "common garbage" it has a specific place for it.
Fire arms are handled by the LEOs, yes, when the TSA finds it they document it, perhaps including photos, but its the job of the LEO to determine what happens with the firearm.
Knifes are prohibited and you have the option to put it back in your vehicle or to surrender it. If the knife is surrendered, it is documented as well and place in a specific bin for those.

Anonymous said...

im guessing this has been answered about 20 times. Look back at old post for your answer.
--
You would be guessing wrong. It has never been addressed. If it has, point us to the answer.

RB said...

 Anonymous said...Right back at you RB--approximately how many times a year do you fly? I think that's a fair question. Is it just Miami or the whole system that's lengthy?August 5, 2015 at 4:30 PM
.................
You'll get your answer just as soon as my question to Kathy is answered.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...And why won't TSA answer the long standing question of why confiscated LGA's are tossed in common trash bins right at the checkpoints instead of being treated as potential explosives? Aren't LGA's taken because they could be weapons? Yet TSA treats these items as completely harmless which begs the question, does TSA already know that these LGA's are actually harmless and has no good reason to continue the confiscation of these items?

im guessing this has been answered about 20 times. Look back at old post for your answer.August 6, 2015 at 10:03 AM

I looked, not answered!

Air Pistol 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.

Susan Richart said...

The all-knowing one has written:

"they miss 95% of what is attempted based on internal tests designed to fail. Meaningless results."

The 95% failure rate was NOT discovered by the TSA's Red Team testing, but rather by the DHS OIG's investigators, who set up rather simple tests of the ability of the TSA screeners to find WEI, which they failed miserably.

The TSA is NOT the reason that planes are not falling out of the sky due to terrorism. The reason is there are no terrorists with designs on aircraft, or trains or shopping centers or buses or anything else for that matter.

Just for the record for yet another anonymous poster who doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to set forth his/her name, I am not nor have I ever been a TSA employee.

Anonymous said...

Blod TSApologist, since you don't work for the TSA by your own admittance, you can stop denying the fact that the 95% failure rate in recent TSA screening area tests is significant. Your constant denials and dismissiveness of these tests indicates you have some stake in the game. What is it? Was a friend or relative part of the failing screening team?

Anonymous said...

No, Bold TSApologist, they haven't answered the question yet. But if you find an answer in a blog post by the TSA blotter team, provide a link.

Anonymous said...

Kathy, never mind what the TSAnonymous employee (Lynn? Lisa?) says. She has it in her mind that if she keeps accusing Susan and RB of working for this lame excuse of a gov't department, they'll get mad and leave. Or someone will actually believe her ridiculous statements and dismiss Susan or RB like we all do the anonymous screeners who post on this government website.

TSAnonymous, did you approve your own comment?

West, did you approve her comment? Why? You know it's a lie. You know who both Susan and RB are from different websites. Why are you allowing lies and personal attacks which are against blog policy?

Susan Richart said...

Snort! "LGA's that are tossed in the garbage after they are voluntarily surrendered ( Its an option, they are not taking them away from you) it is chemically tested to make sure not an explosive, then thrown away."

In what world do you live (or what airport do you work at)? If they are chemically tested to make certain they are not explosive, then why are they tossed away if they are not? Why not let the passenger keep them?

All I've ever seen are LGA's confiscated from passengers and thrown directly into the trash bin.

Please come up with a more believable story next time.

screen shot/DHS OIG statement



Anonymous said...

The all-knowing one has written:

"they miss 95% of what is attempted based on internal tests designed to fail. Meaningless results."

The 95% failure rate was NOT discovered by the TSA's Red Team testing, but rather by the DHS OIG's investigators, who set up rather simple tests of the ability of the TSA screeners to find WEI, which they failed miserably. what do you know about these test that enables you to call the ""simple?" and no, the information was released by OIG.

The TSA is NOT the reason that planes are not falling out of the sky due to terrorism. The reason is there are no terrorists with designs on aircraft, or trains or shopping centers or buses or anything else for that matter. You cannot possibly believe that commercial aviation is not a top priority target for terrorist. Ever seen inspire magazine? Just for the record for yet another anonymous poster who doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to set forth his/her name, I am not nor have I ever been a TSA employee. Are names important?

Anonymous said...

Blod TSApologist, since you don't work for the TSA by your own admittance, you can stop denying the fact that the 95% failure rate in recent TSA screening area tests is significant. Your constant denials and dismissiveness of these tests indicates you have some stake in the game. What is it? Was a friend or relative part of the failing screening team?

no, the results are completely meaningless. As I have said before the officers are tested every year. They have to be to keep their jobs. There is an over 85% first time pass rate for officer certification testing. The red team test are designed to test "breaking points" and potential weaknesses. Much as if you were testing the breaking point of concrete. Because it broke, does not mean it failed. It may very well have broken beyond the acceptable threshold. I'm not looking at tests to determine success or failure. I'm looking at over a decade of no terror attacks carried out on an American based flight.

Anonymous said...

No, Bold TSApologist, they haven't answered the question yet. But if you find an answer in a blog post by the TSA blotter team, provide a link.

I have personally answered your question. Because you don't like the answer does not mean it wasn't answered. it really is a very simple answer. Common sense should actually provide the answer for you

Anonymous said...

Why are you allowing lies and personal attacks which are against blog policy?
It isn't a lie if it believed to be true. And I believe it is true.

Anonymous said...

Why are you allowing lies and personal attacks which are against blog policy?

pretty sure I have never attacked anyone personally. I don't know anyone here.

You say I lie because I say susan and others are disgruntled ex-tsa employees. As I said, that is my beliefe and thus not a lie. But if my belief is a lie because it isn't true and thus I shouldn't say it...
I guess others will have to stop saying TSA confiscates items from passenger. they would also have to stop calling the scanners "naked body scanners". Would have to call TSA officers "officers" rather than clerks. West allows those "lies" just as he allows my "lies." Should we all stop or is it just me that has too?

Puddintane said...

"Anonymous said...
No, Bold TSApologist, they haven't answered the question yet. But if you find an answer in a blog post by the TSA blotter team, provide a link.

I have personally answered your question. Because you don't like the answer does not mean it wasn't answered. it really is a very simple answer. Common sense should actually provide the answer for you

Then for the sake of those of us who are unable to locate your answer, please post it again.

RB said...

"West allows those "lies" just as he allows my "lies." Should we all stop or is it just me that has too?"

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

So you do admit that you are lying.

GSOLTSO said...

Kathy Richardson sez - "I was permitted to just finish the water, with a laugh and a good wish for the rest of my travels." and a lot of other stuff that was really nice!

Thanks for the kind words Kathy, we appreciate the understanding and you taking the time to write us. Happy travels.

Susan sez - "Kathy Richardson, since when has water in a bottle been allowed on a domestic flight? Methinks you are just making things up."

This is incorrect, water IS allowed on almost all domestic flights, it just has to be purchased (or an empty bottle may be filled up) past the checkpoint area.

I am uncertain of whether it is a Customs/Immigration requirement or an airline requirement or a specific foreign country requirement, but some flights do not allow water to be taken with while one is flying internationally.

West
TSA Blog Team

Susan Richart said...

Kathy Richardson was referring to bottled water being allowed through the checkpoint line, West, and you know it.

"I felt really bad when I forgot that I had the last swallow in the bottom in the bottom in my water bottle since my International flight was flight #3, and water was permitted for domestic flights"

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

TSORon said...

Anonymous said...
[[I have personally answered your question. Because you don't like the answer does not mean it wasn't answered. it really is a very simple answer. Common sense should actually provide the answer for you]]

I also have answered this question for the local populace of commenters, but it was not an answer that they wished to accept. It has in fact been answered quite a few times, with the same reaction by the other posters. And no, I am not willing to go back through 7 years of my posts looking for those answers already provided. The folks could ask RB, he has been posting here at least as long as I have, and is just as capable of finding those answers as either of us are.

Anonymous said...

The Bold TSApologist said, "no, the results are completely meaningless. As I have said before the officers are tested every year. They have to be to keep their jobs. There is an over 85% first time pass rate for officer certification testing. The red team test are designed to test "breaking points" and potential weaknesses.

You claim to not be a TSA employee, so all of your statements do not come from a point of actual knowledge. Yearly screener testing (as described in detail by Jason Harrington, an actual former-TSA employee) is not the same thing as the 95% failure-rate test.

As has been stated publicly in the 95% failure-rate test articles, as well as addressed directly to you, Bold TSApologist, it was NOT the TSA Red Team doing the test. It was DHS OIG's investigators. Why do you continue to ignore this fact?

Who do you know that works in the TSA? A screener? One of the blotter team? Someone in the PR office? Why do you refuse to admit that someone in your life works for the TSA?

Anonymous said...

GSOLTSO said...
This is incorrect, water IS allowed on almost all domestic flights, it just has to be purchased (or an empty bottle may be filled up) past the checkpoint area.

1) Exactly how much kickback does the TSA get on the over-priced water sold past the checkpoints?

2) Why is that water 'safe', while the exact same brand and size of water purchased at a store outside the checkpoint is 'unsafe'??

3) Why is this 'unsafe' water confiscated... and then dropped into a common trash can at the checkpoint?? If it is unsafe, it should be handled less casually. If, on the other hand, it is safe enough to just drop in a trash can, then it should be safe enough to allow through. The TSA has NEVER explained this fundamental contradiction.

SSSS for Some Reason said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
No, Bold TSApologist, they haven't answered the question yet. But if you find an answer in a blog post by the TSA blotter team, provide a link.

I have personally answered your question. Because you don't like the answer does not mean it wasn't answered. it really is a very simple answer. Common sense should actually provide the answer for you

~~~~~~

I thought you said you didn't work for the TSA. But now you are answering questions for them? WHich is it... you work for them, or you don't?

GSOLTSO said...

Susan sez - "Kathy Richardson was referring to bottled water being allowed through the checkpoint line, West, and you know it.

"I felt really bad when I forgot that I had the last swallow in the bottom in the bottom in my water bottle since my International flight was flight #3, and water was permitted for domestic flights"

She indicated that she was allowed to finish the bottle of water when she was boarding the 3rd leg of her flight - which was international. Bottled water is allowed on all domestic flights, as long as it is purchased past the checkpoint area, or an empty bottle is filled up past the checkpoint.

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

Ron, you claim to have answered the question of why water is too dangerous to go through a screening area, but is dropped in the trash right at the screening area.

So what? You are not part of the blotter team, are you? You are not listed as ever being part of the TSA PR dept.

Are you authorized to speak officially for the TSA on this blog? West said no screeners commenting here speaks for official policy on this blog, only the blotter team.

Since just you and your TSAnonymous buddies *may* have said something about TSA's irrational rationale, but the blotter team refuses to point to where they've answered this question, your statement has no value.

Blotter Team, will YOU ever answer the question?

Anonymous said...

Bold TSApologist: are you claiming you posted both the August 2, 2015 at 10:47am comment AND the August 3, 2015 at 10:02am comment (bold section)?

They are written in very different styles and spelling ability.

RB said...

TSORon said...Anonymous said...[[I have personally answered your question. Because you don't like the answer does not mean it wasn't answered. it really is a very simple answer. Common sense should actually provide the answer for you]]I also have answered this question for the local populace of commenters, but it was not an answer that they wished to accept. It has in fact been answered quite a few times, with the same reaction by the other posters. And no, I am not willing to go back through 7 years of my posts looking for those answers already provided. The folks could ask RB, he has been posting here at least as long as I have, and is just as capable of finding those answers as either of us are.August 13, 2015 at 11:52 AM

?...............?

I disagree that the question of why potentionally dangerous LGA's are disposed of in common trash bins has ever been answered by you or any other TSA employee or spokesperson.

There's a very remote chance that my memory is imperfect on this point.

I certainly don't see why restating the answer to that question is such a demanding exercise for highly trained TSA "Officers".

Doober said...

RB, Ron gave this answer back in 2009.

""Standard liquid items (water, G2, sodas, etc) are tossed into a trash can and disposed of in the usual manner. Liquid items containing hazardous materials are transported to an appropriate storage area / container and later disposed of using the appropriate protocols. Liquor and other alcoholic drinks are poured down a drain and that disposal documented and witnessed. Other hazardous materials are disposed of as EPA and GAO directives mandate."

However, another poster blew his comment wide open with this response:

"Since TSA does no testing of any kind on the liquids it confiscates, you have no way of knowing what's hazardous and what isn't.

If you're going by the labels to determine what's hazardous and what's not, you've just admitted that the liquids policies are pointless: If a bottle's being labeled "Pepsi" is proof enough that it contains only harmless soda to determine how to dispose of it, then you have no reason not to accept that same label as proof that the contents are harmless soda that should be allowed on a plane."

Therefore, Ron's claim that he "answered" the question is balderdash.

Anonymous said...

West wrote:

""I felt really bad when I forgot that I had the last swallow in the bottom in the bottom in my water bottle since my International flight was flight #3, and water was permitted for domestic flights"

She indicated that she was allowed to finish the bottle of water when she was boarding the 3rd leg of her flight - which was international. Bottled water is allowed on all domestic flights, as long as it is purchased past the checkpoint area, or an empty bottle is filled up past the checkpoint."

Interesting to note that you know "#3" meant the third leg of her flight and not her flight number. How did you know this, West? Is Kathy Richardson known to you personally?

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

GSOLTSO said...

Anon sez - "Interesting to note that you know "#3" meant the third leg of her flight and not her flight number. How did you know this, West? Is Kathy Richardson known to you personally?"

Reading comprehension was always one of my better subjects, read the original sentence one more time "I felt really bad when I forgot that I had the last swallow in the bottom in the bottom in my water bottle since my International flight was flight #3, and water was permitted for domestic flights".

Additionally, the only flight numbers in the single digit range I have ever heard of were military flights, or private contractor flights (and even those had additional indicators tacked on to them).

Finally, no, Kathy Richardson is not known to me personally (or professionally for that matter).

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

Thank-you, Doober, for being a commenter that actually helped move forward this conversation about the improper confiscation and disposal of liquids at TSA screening areas.

Rather unlike the TSA employees and their cheerleader who keep telling the American public, "WE ALREADY ANSWERED THAT QUESTION EVEN WE WON'T PROVIDE ANY PROOF THAT WE DID!"

RB said...

GSOLTSO said...Anon sez - "Interesting to note that you know "#3" meant the third leg of her flight and not her flight number. How did you know this, West? Is Kathy Richardson known to you personally?


"Reading comprehension was always one of my better subjects, read the original sentence one more time "I felt really bad when I forgot that I had the last swallow in the bottom in the bottom in my water bottle since my International flight was flight #3, and water was permitted for domestic flights". Additionally, the only flight numbers in the single digit range I have ever heard of were military flights, or private contractor flights (and even those had additional indicators tacked on to them).Finally, no, Kathy Richardson is not known to me personally (or professionally for that matter).WestTSA Blog TeamAugust 18, 2015 at 12:50 PM

?............?
The real question is what would have happened to the water bottle if full or even partially full?

We all know the answer, straight in a trashcan right at the checkpoint proving that TSA saw no threat in the item.

No threat items should fly!

Sandra said...

"the only flight numbers in the single digit range I have ever heard of were military flights"

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL3

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL6

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL4

Lots of airlines have flights with single numbers, West. You need to update yourself. It seems Susan's was right on target when she read Richardson's post as being the flight number. You owe her an apology.

Anonymous said...

Sandra said...
"the only flight numbers in the single digit range I have ever heard of were military flights"

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL3

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL6

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL4

Lots of airlines have flights with single numbers, West. You need to update yourself. It seems Susan's was right on target when she read Richardson's post as being the flight number. You owe her an apology.

~~

Interesting that West approved the above comment but wasn't man enough to apologize or admit his error.

RB said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sandra said...
"the only flight numbers in the single digit range I have ever heard of were military flights"

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL3

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL6

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL4

Lots of airlines have flights with single numbers, West. You need to update yourself. It seems Susan's was right on target when she read Richardson's post as being the flight number. You owe her an apology.

~~

Interesting that West approved the above comment but wasn't man enough to apologize or admit his error.

August 21, 2015 at 11:20 AM
...................................
TSA apologize? Surely you jest.

Anonymous said...

Interesting that West approved the above comment but wasn't man enough to apologize or admit his error.
--
Are we sure West is an actual person and not some form of chatterbox? I mean, I've had better conversations with Eliza ;)

Anonymous said...

West says:

"Reading comprehension was always one of my better subjects"

So was smug condescension while being completely WRONG about subjects.

But being in the TSA means never having to admit you're wrong or say you're sorry, it seems. If reality contradicts the mighty West and Bobby, it's obviously REALITY that's in the wrong...

GSOLTSO said...

Sandra sez - "Lots of airlines have flights with single numbers, West. You need to update yourself. It seems Susan's was right on target when she read Richardson's post as being the flight number. You owe her an apology. "

You are correct, I was mistaken about the single digit flight numbers, I apologize for being wrong. However, flight #3 linked to is a domestic flight, not international. Have any of you found a flight #3 that was from the US to an international destination? (seriously, can any of you guys find one?)

Anon sez - "Interesting that West approved the above comment but wasn't man enough to apologize or admit his error."

Wow. As pointed out previously, we have other job duties that we have to take care of in addition to the blog.

Anon sez - "Are we sure West is an actual person and not some form of chatterbox? I mean, I've had better conversations with Eliza ;)"

Of course I am an actual person, Skynet is still in Alpha testing. Apparently, we have both had better conversations with Eliza!

Anon sez - "But being in the TSA means never having to admit you're wrong or say you're sorry, it seems. If reality contradicts the mighty West and Bobby, it's obviously REALITY that's in the wrong..."

Obviously, you are not a long time reader, as I have apologized many times before, and I am certain that I will be doing so again in the future. We all make mistakes from time to time.

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...And why won't TSA answer the long standing question of why confiscated LGA's are tossed in common trash bins right at the checkpoints instead of being treated as potential explosives? Aren't LGA's taken because they could be weapons? Yet TSA treats these items as completely harmless which begs the question, does TSA already know that these LGA's are actually harmless and has no good reason to continue the confiscation of these items?

im guessing this has been answered about 20 times. Look back at old post for your answer.August 6, 2015 at 10:03 AM

I looked, not answered!

OK, Ill answer this again. When liquids are surrendered to TSA they are put in a standard trash can or a HAZ MAT container. Most liquids such as water, soda and other unopened containers probably do not get tested when surrendered. The reason TSA does not test them and allow them is because if TSA allowed all tested and cleared liquids to travel, they would be for ever testing water bottles. TSA does not have the man power or the time testing water bottles. It would be absurd to think they should. They have two options, only allow those needed liquids after testing or allow all liquids to go un-tested. its really more of a practicality policy. It would not be feasible, practical, timely or safe to do otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Bold TSApologist, your answer had no value or credible information because you have stated on this blotter that you are not a TSA employee.

Blotter team, will YOU ever answer?

Bold TSApologist, attempting to "answer" a legitimate question by the American public as if you are a TSA employee is intentionally deceptive. Just because you know a TSA employee does not make you an expert on terrorism, securiity, or even the TSA.