Friday, August 14, 2015

TSA Week in Review: 41 Loaded Firearms, and More Batarangs

The firearm pictured was discovered in a carry-on bag at SDF.

55 Firearms Discovered This Week– of the 55 firearms discovered, 41 were loaded and 15 had a round chambered. The firearm pictured above was discovered in a carry-on bag at SDF.

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. 


Batarangs

Four batarangs were discovered in a carry-on bag this week at Boise (BOI).
Meat Slicer
A meat slicer was discovered in a carry-on bag at the Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW). Blades on slicers, blenders, and food processors are razor sharp and are prohibited from being packed in carry-on bags.
Knives, Machete, Hatchet, Throwing Star
Counterclockwise from the top, the pictured items were discovered at: IAH, DEN, IAH, EWR, BOI, ORF, ORF, IAH, SJU, JAC, SNA, ATL, AUS, ORF, LAS and PVD.


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.

  • An inert 81mm mortar round was detected in a checked bag at Great Falls (GFT).
  • Two inert grenades were discovered in a carry-on bag at Salt Lake City.
  • A novelty grenade was discovered in a carry-on bag this week at Ontario (ONT). It resulted in the closure of terminal four. 11 flights were delayed as explosives professionals determined whether the grenade was live or inert.



Stun Guns - 28 stun guns were discovered in carry-on bags this week at airports around the nation. Three were discovered at Dallas/ Fort Worth (DFW), three at San Francisco (SFO), and the remainder were found at Denver (DEN), Amarillo (AMA), Baltimore (BWI), Bellingham (BLI), Bismarck (BIS),   Charleston (CHS), Charlotte (CLT), Denver (DEN), Fort Lauderdale (FLL), Grand Rapids (GRR),   Houston Intercontinental (IAH), Las Vegas (LAS), Lihue (LIH), Mammoth Lake (MMH),Minneapolis (MSP), New York LaGuardia (LGA), Portland (PDX), Sacramento (SMF), San Diego (SAN), Seattle (SEA), Washington Reagan National (DCA) and Wilmington (ILM).


The ammo pictured here was discovered in a carry-on bag at MDW.

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 here was discovered in a carry-on bag at MDW.
Loaded firearms.
Clockwise from the top, these firearms were discovered in carry-on bags at ATL, OAK, SDF and OKC
Loaded firearms.
Clockwise from the top left, these firearms were discovered in carry-on bags at BNA, BOI and SMF
55 Firearms Discovered This Week– of the 55 firearms discovered, 41 were loaded and 15 had a round chambered.

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.








27 comments:

Anonymous said...

Bob, you're reusing photos from previous weeks again.

If you cannot be accurate in showing us weapons allegedly found this week, turn this blotter over to someone who can be accurate.

Doober said...

An entire page for one week's "look what we found" report, Bob? Really?

screen shot

Anonymous said...

Note the part in the article where the TSA (again) tries to hide embarrassing information from the taxpaying public with their fake "SSI" labeling. How many years will the US public have to wait to see all of the lies and abuses the TSA had been hiding?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/us/federal-air-marshals-investigation/

RB said...

Was the meat slicer confiscated or did the owner have the opportunity to check the item. The story is incomplete without a resolution.

I can understand why TSA makes a weekly post showing what has been found at checkpoints but the weekly cut and paste is so boring that readers of this blog are walking away in droves. A couple of years ago 100 plus comments were common but no more.

Why not expend a skosh of effort and use a bit of creativity for these weekly posts.

RB said...

I have a question about TSA's Pre Check.

I recently flew a flight of three legs and had Pre Check on all three flights. That tells me that TSA has enough information to know that I am a low enough risk to receive expedited screening.

So why should anyone in this situation need any more investigation or have to pay tribute to TSA for something TSA already knows?

Looks to me that TSA is just running a scam to take money from citizens.

Anonymous said...

"...A meat slicer was discovered in a carry-on bag at the Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW)."

So the fear is a Terrorist might try and take over the aircraft with cold cuts? Or maybe try and kill the pilots with a sandwich?

Ben Hurt said...

Every week it's the same mystifying but also boring story: dozens of idiots trying to board with weapons, and the TSA shows incompetence by never addressing the outcome. What happens to these idiots? Slap on the wrist? Are you hiding something? What if the police told us every week that they had caught 40 criminals but they never explained anything? That's how dumb this report is. Either tell us the whole story or I am signing off.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand why people are carrying loaded weapons in airports--still?
Is there a penalty for this? Regardless if they have a permit or not?
Are you permitted to travel with a gun if it's in a carry on?

Anonymous said...

I guess that West isn't back from vacation yet and that no one on weekend duty in Bob's office has the ability to allow comments. Great job, yet again, TSA!

Anonymous said...

West just logged in.

RB said...

9 comments and 5 of those are about the performance, or lack of, by the TSA Blog Team.

Seems someone at TSA should be smart enough to figure out that something is afoul with the TSA Blog Team.

Robert Lefter said...

So, getting 55 guns is good work, and I have been looking back through this blog and that number seems to be fairly average for the number you get week to week. But I am concerned greatly on the test DHS did that came out in June that shows that the TSA failed 67 out of 70 tests. What that tells me that at least before these test results were brought to your attention, and given these numbers, that around 1400 firearms are/were being taken onto planes every week.

I would be interested in reading on this blog about methods being used to help prevent such a large hole in your system, such as regularly scheduled and mandatory training or the hiring of more proficient and capable agents. Rather then some gun numbers that look just like last week, because it would seem after hearing the DHS report and how your numbers have not changed drastically since then, well, it just seems like there is a waterfall and you are bragging about how you are stopping it by scooping up a handful of water.

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.

GSOLTSO said...

Anon sez - "Bob, you're reusing photos from previous weeks again."

Which one(s)?


RB sez - " Was the meat slicer confiscated or did the owner have the opportunity to check the item. The story is incomplete without a resolution."

I can not comment on this particular situation, but having found a similar slicer previously in a carry on bag, the individual was given the option to take the item back out to their vehicle, give it to a friend or family member that was here, check the bag under the plane, or dispose of it (they chose to check the bag).

Anon sez - " So the fear is a Terrorist might try and take over the aircraft with cold cuts? Or maybe try and kill the pilots with a sandwich?"

I think the idea is more along the lines of keeping a great big blade out of the passenger compartment... although some of the sandwiches I have seen and/or made in the past would be large enough to kill mere mortals.

Ben Hurt sez - "What happens to these idiots? Slap on the wrist? Are you hiding something? What if the police told us every week that they had caught 40 criminals but they never explained anything?"

This is a bit of an inapt comparison, police departments nationwide have tons of arrests that never give much of an explanation (even in certain types of required blotter reports). As for what happens to the individuals bringing items through with them and being caught - it is determined by the local LEOs. If someone has an item like a firearm, each location has their own set of laws governing the response buy the LEOs, some have stiff penalties, some not so much. We would hate to lose your readership, but as the reporting structure exists now, it would be near impossible to provide the results (also there are tons of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) regulations that govern the release of information).

Anon sez - "I guess that West isn't back from vacation yet and that no one on weekend duty in Bob's office has the ability to allow comments. Great job, yet again, TSA!"

As well as - "West just logged in."

I was not on vacation, just regular days off, like a weekend, you know, like the majority of people out there get!

RB sez - "Seems someone at TSA should be smart enough to figure out that something is afoul with the TSA Blog Team."

I do like chicken, especially if it is double dipped and fried!

West
TSA Blog Team

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...

RB sez - "Seems someone at TSA should be smart enough to figure out that something is afoul with the TSA Blog Team."

I do like chicken, especially if it is double dipped and fried!

West
TSA Blog Team


August 17, 2015 at 7:27 AM
.................
Afoul and foul, not the same meaning West.

The point, which has been made by multiple posters, is that the TSA Blog Team seems to be disinterested in the continuance of this blog. Guess you guys can just keep on phoning it in instead expending a tiny bit of effort.

I'm thinking that Blogger Bob is burned out and needs to find someone to replace him.

TSORon said...

Anonymous said...
[[Note the part in the article where the TSA (again) tries to hide embarrassing information from the taxpaying public with their fake "SSI" labeling.]]

"SSI got its start in the Air Transportation Security Act of 1974 (Pub. L. No. 93-366)" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_Security_Information)

1974, long before the TSA came about.

Anonymous said...

Blogger GSOLTSO said...
Anon sez - "Bob, you're reusing photos from previous weeks again."

Which one(s)?


It took me two minutes to find the problem. I am not being paid to do Bob's job for him.

Since he has never corrected reused photos before, should we expect this one to get corrected, with proper, professional notice of editing?

GSOLTSO said...

Rb sez - "Afoul and foul, not the same meaning West."

I think you may have meant "Afoul and fowl, not the same meaning".


TSORon sez - "1974, long before the TSA came about."

That point has been reiterated here and at many other sites since at least 2008 by myself and many others.

West
TSA Blog Team

Doober said...

Nobody's questioning when SSI came about, Ron (and West). What is being questioned is the TSA's over-use of the designation in order to keep the public in the dark about so many of the agency's actions.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the info on SSI, West and Ron. Interesting information.

I still maintain that the TSA uses "SSI" labeling to hide embarrassing information, much like former FAA Special Agent Brian Sullivan stated: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/tsa-misusing-ssi-to-avoid-embarrassment-liability-former-faa-special-agent-charges-55867087.html

And it is still a BS designation, IMHO, no matter when it was created or who created it.

RB said...

GSOLTSO said..

.Rb sez - "Afoul and foul, not the same meaning West."


"I think you may have meant "Afoul and fowl, not the same meaning".

Yes, but I think we all get the meaning.

"TSORon sez - "1974, long before the TSA came about."

That point has been reiterated here and at many other sites since at least 2008 by myself and many others.
West TSA Blog Team
August 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM""


No matter the origin TSA adopted the faux SSI designation and we all know that SSI is not a true security clsssification Executive Order, signed 12/29/2009 is the latest directive for classification. If TSA wants to claim that SSI is a true classification then perhaps TSA should pay attention to Section 1.7, item 2.

Anonymous said...

Any imbecile bringing a loaded and chambered firearm into an airport or onto a plane, especially, should lose their weapon for good and have their CCW permit (if required by their resident state) suspended. I am not against firearm ownership, but there is no excuse for recklessness and ignorance of the law, and if you are ignorant of the law or disobeying it, you are not a responsible gun owner. These people should be held accountable.

Don Power said...

I find it incredible that in this day and age people STILL show up at airports with loaded firearms! WOW!

GSOLTSO said...

Doober sez - " What is being questioned is the TSA's over-use of the designation in order to keep the public in the dark about so many of the agency's actions."

Ok, that is also a larger conversation that will have to be done at the policy making level - although I am certain that there are many folks that will argue for/against both sides on this issue. There is a fine line of what should be classified at some level (under the differing levels SSI, Secret, TS, TSBI, TSBI-SS, etc), and the key is finding the right balance for the info released and the info retained out of public sector. I am fairly certain that you and I will fall on opposite sides of that discussion at certain places, but alas, I am not involved in policy making.

Anon sez - "I still maintain that the TSA uses "SSI" labeling to hide embarrassing information, much like former FAA Special Agent Brian Sullivan stated (followed by a link)"

TSA may indeed use SSI too much for your tastes, however, they are currently ok based upon policy and the legal system (barring a court decision I am unaware of). Just a couple of points about the link, it is fairly old based upon a basic search (at least prior to Jan 1, 2013 unless google is wrong), and the individual being quoted is a former employee of the FAA, not TSA. Some of what Sullivan states has some merit, but I question whether his personal experience is applicable in the current process due to the amount of time between his service and now.

West
TSA Blog Team

Anonymous said...

West, from the time former FAA Special Agent Brian Sullivan wrote or was quoted in the article until present day, TSA has gotten only worse in abusing the SSI label to hide embarrassing information from the American public.

Anonymous said...

"...Anonymous Anonymous said... I am not against firearm ownership, but there is no excuse for recklessness and ignorance of the law"

You say you are not against firearm ownership yet you want peoples firearms taken away from them. And why do you say reckless? Were they handling their firearms? Brandishing their firearms? What is reckless about simply owning a firearm?