Friday, September 18, 2015

TSA Week in Review: Record 67 Firearms Discovered in Carry-on Bags This Week (56 Loaded)



A record number of 67 firearms were discovered this week in carry-on bags around the nation. The previous record of 65 firearms was set in 2013. Of the 67 firearms discovered, 56 were loaded and 26 had a round chambered. All of the firearms pictured here were discovered this week. See a complete list below.



16 ounces of black powder was detected in a checked bag at Houston (IAH). Black powder (gun powder) is an explosive and is prohibited from being transported in carry-on and checked bags.


Two belt buckle knives were discovered this week at Hilo (ITO) and Denver (DEN).


Clockwise from the top, the throwing stars were discovered in carry-on bags at YAK, DAL, MEM and BDL
Stun Guns - 19 stun guns were discovered this week in carry-on bags around the nation. Two were discovered at Dallas Love (DAL), two at Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW), two at Nashville (BNA), and the remainder were discovered at Atlanta (ATL), Charlottesville (CHO), Chicago O'Hare (ORD), Denver (DEN), Easterwood (CLL), Houston Intercontinental (IAH), Memphis (MEM), Myrtle Beach (MYR), Norfolk (ORF), Oakland (OAK), Pullman (PUW), Rochester (ROC), and Sacramento (SMF). 

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. 

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



45 comments:

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...

Anything TSA might want to share with the public about Managed Inclusion III?

I don't understandwhy I need to apply for Pre Check if TSA knows enough about me to give Pre Check on multiple flights through my airline.

Paid Pre Check is extortion.

Susan Richart said...

From West's comment to me about his testinest in another thread:

"Susan sez - "Getting a bit testy, West, after being called out by several different posters?"

Not even remotely. I am just tickled pink to be here and helping out! Please fire away, I am singularly content with my lot in life."

Remember, West, when you and your tremendous ego were all over the internet "helping out?" You don't help at all; all you do is defend your agency.

Further, in response to another statement of yours in the Labor Day thread, yes, you do censor comments that fully meet the Blog's TOS; as well, you allow comments that don't meet the Blog's TOS.




Anonymous said...

How can I tell if a pat-down is being properly conducted, or if it crosses the line into sexual assault?

Anonymous said...

"...All of the firearms pictured here were discovered this week"

Nope.

At least three of the photos in your collage are recycled pictures from other posts.

You may have found something similar to the picture, but that is not the same.

Anonymous said...

Why aren't you touting the latest push to get the American public to pay for their rights and freedoms (Managed Inclusion 3)?

Anonymous said...

Why would I ask a private contractor working from a script to answer my TSA-related questions on Twitter?

That's right. There are several TSA Twitter accounts already set up for TSA public relations, but the government employees who are paid by our tax dollars don't bother interacting with the public or answering questions. they just spam each other's Tweets.

What a huge waste of taxpayer dough!

DoD Civilian said...

I'm a DoD civilian who used to get PreCheck all the time with my CAC number. I haven't gotten PreCheck for my last four trips. Have you ended Precheck access for DoD civilians?

Anonymous said...

Bob, can you adjust how the comments are displayed? It would make more sense if the comments displayed threaded rather than chronologically.

Anonymous said...

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

Dragonflower said...

It never ceases to amaze me that people go out of their way to make negative comments. Even if these searches show one weapon and ammunition and they save one plane, you better believe your inconvenience is worth it.

RB said...

My question to TSA asking why my comment about a certain TSA parody video keeps getting censored was once again censored. There was nothing in my comment that did not meet the TSA posting guidelines. So West's claim that he and TSA is not censoring compliant comments is a pure out and out lie.

I guess we can settle the whole question by doing a FOIA submission and obtaining all censored/deleted comments.

This blog is covered under the Privacy Act and any comments submitted are government records so TSA must have all comments on file or not be in compliance with federal law.

Anonymous said...

"Even if these searches show one weapon and ammunition and they save one plane, you better believe your inconvenience is worth it."

Weapons and ammunition are found by the least invasive, least inconvenient screening there is - X-rays of baggage and WTMDs for passengers. Just about nobody objects to that. What many DO object to are the many, many things TSA does that make no one safer, like:

- The shoe carnival, unduplicated anywhere in the world, which has never found an explosive and the absence of which in other countries has not made air travel there any less safe.

- The use of slow, ineffective, and invasive naked body scanners, which have a false positive rate approaching 100% and take much longer than other, less invasive forms of screening.

- The nonsensical 3.4-1-1 policy on liquids, implemented in a blind, stupid panic in response to a purely aspirational plot by people who did not have passports, airline tickets, or - and this is the big one - actual liquid explosives, because liquids powerful enough to damage an airplane are too unstable to make it to the airport without going off

- The use of "behavior detection" techniques which have been debunked as utterly useless, time and time again, at an enormous cost to taxpayers.

All of these things make screening longer and more unpleasant and provide absolutely zero increase in security.

Anonymous said...

Good job guys, thanks for keeping the airways safe from those who would knowingly attempt to carry a weapon on a plane in today's world! We will never know what they had in mind, so again kudos.

Anonymous said...

It never ceases to amaze me that people go out of their way to make sweeping generalizations about how much we should give up to appease the security apparatus of the TSA.

"Even if these searches were top be expanded to your automobile and show one weapon and ammunition and they save one car, you better believe your inconvenience is worth it" just doesn't sound as appealing, does it?

Jim Turner said...

When I collected my bag in Des Moines this evening, the TSA lock that I've used on my bag for years was gone. Inside my bag was the usual inspection insert from TSA. Since the lock was present and secure when I surrendered my bag at OKC and missing when I collected my TSA-opened/inspected bag at DSM, I can only presume that out of ineptitude or laziness, some TSA rep broke the lock and tossed it rather than using a key that you have to open it. I also note that the frequency at which my bag is opened and inspected by the TSA has increased remarkably since I started packing my extra laptop screen inside. Sadly, TSA has a long and well documented history of agents pilfering valuables from inside checked bags. I've little doubt TSA agents think they see a full laptop on the X-Ray and open my bag to steal the same. Imagine their disappointment when they find it is only an extra screen -- a device they clearly do not know how to use/pawn/sell on eBay. I suppose that's some consolation for me. Tell your sticky-fingered agents to keep their damn hands out of my bag, and shame on you for breaking my lock! TSA = Thousands Standing Around

Anonymous said...

I can't wait for the explanation for the screw up in Orlando. TSO threatens a passenger and another orders them to leave the airport. Two pat downs, complete luggage search, and swabbing for explosives, and all because someone felt threatened by a transgendered individual.

Anonymous said...

Finding one gun, Dragonflower, did nothing to stop terrorism because the gun wasn't owned by a terrorist.

$8,000,000,000 per year for the TSA. 12,000,000 people assaulted, stolen from, delayed, and harassed.
Over 100,000 flights per week.

The TSA is not worth it. "One plane" that was never in danger is not worth it.

Susan Richart said...

Although I know it's a waste of keystrokes to ask, but care to explain the several violations committed by the TSA in this incident, West?

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/21/9367327/transgender-shadi-petosky-twitter-orlando-airport

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Anonymous said...

I still haven't seen an explanation on how a pie is allowed to be taken through security but other items containing far less liquid or gel are prohibited. There has to be a reason.

Anonymous said...

Any post coming forward soon about the Orlando screeners at MCO who abused a transgender passenger?

Were they following TSA's procedures?

Anonymous said...

I filed an official complaint with TSA more than a month ago regarding an improper patdown (assault) or my 7 month old baby. Does TSA actually ever respond to Complaints? How long would it take to review the video tape, talk to the TSA agent and respond?

Doober said...

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/25467973-post1.html

TSA missing ammunition in carry-ons.

RB said...

Susan Richart said...
Although I know it's a waste of keystrokes to ask, but care to explain the several violations committed by the TSA in this incident, West?

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/21/9367327/transgender-shadi-petosky-twitter-orlando-airport

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

September 22, 2015 at 6:55 AM

......................
TSA's Blog Team just goes silent when they don't want to address "All Things TSA".

RB said...

TSA agent stole passenger’s money at checkpoint, police say

Seems TSA's high standards are well at work in New York.

What is this, three recent examples of TSA excellence?

Sexual Assualt
Stolen Watch
Stolen Cash

all at the hands of TSA's trusted employees.

Anonymous said...

How many prosthetic penises did you find? And why aren't they on the blog with the throwing stars?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/23/tsa-agents-transgender-people-trauma

Anonymous said...

No blog post about the public furor over TSA employees' abuse of a transgender woman in Orlando? No blog post blaming the flyer and excusing the TSA employees?

If the TSA did nothing wrong, then why is the TSA hiding? TSA blogged after the Philly TSA Supervisor [NAME REDACTED] perjured himself in court, and made sure to lie about the victim and excuse the screeners.

Anonymous said...


"Even if these searches were top be expanded to your automobile and show one weapon and ammunition and they save one car, you better believe your inconvenience is worth it" just doesn't sound as appealing, does it?"

Proof read much?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
I filed an official complaint with TSA more than a month ago regarding an improper patdown (assault) or my 7 month old baby. Does TSA actually ever respond to Complaints? How long would it take to review the video tape, talk to the TSA agent and respond?



I'm so sorry..... The TSA only has tape that *supports* the Agents actions. When a review of the tapes would support the Citizen's complaint it suddenly goes missing, or was inconclusive, or both.

And as to the time, there are a lot of complaints so it is just going to take some time to get through the list to yours.

Susan Richart said...

Then there was this incident:

http://www.southdadenewsleader.com/news/doris-s-miami-to-philadelphia-flight-boarded-by-tsa/article_be1a670a-62f3-11e5-ae6c-37b03949347b.html

TSA missed a bullet when screening passengers in Miami, then a passenger rather stupidly said something when he either found it or realized the TSA had missed it, so the plane was searched in PHL and the passengers marched, in a single file line by the TSA, through the concourse and were allowed to go. Was that a "show of force" to make up for the fail in Miami or just another way the TSA has found to intimidate passengers?

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

RB said...

I post a comment that mentioned the three TSA screeners who recently made the news and the comment was censored. I think that is pretty much proof that the TSA Blog Team has tossed the posting guidelines out the window and even lied about not censoring compliant comments.

So we had the screener who sexually assaulted an arriving female traveler, the screener who stole a watch worth several thousand dollars and the latest TSA High Performer who stole $61 dollars from a persons wallet.

There is one thing certain, the TSA Blog Team is definitely censoring speech and that action is in violation of the United States Constitution as Amended.

@SkyWayManAz said...

Susan, TSA has already responded:

"A spokesman for the TSA, Mike England, said a review of the incident – including examination of CCTV [']and other available information['] – showed that [']our [screeners] followed TSA’s strict guidelines['].

[']Supervisory personnel and a Passenger Support Specialist participated in the screening to ensure guidelines were met,['] he said in a statement."

Haven't we all heard this line before no matter how outrageous TSA has behaved? Personally I can see this would be a problem if you look like a woman and maybe even your ID says you're a woman but the machine isn't going to see lady parts. That doesn't explain why she wasn't rescanned as a man and sent on her way. Except that we all know TSA policy encourages molestation instead of common sense. Groping confirms something is there a woman should not have and off the rails we go. That's how they say with a straight face they followed the proper guidelines. The guidelines, like the blue gloves, are there to protect TSA, not you.

Anonymous said...

Quoted:
"Anonymous Anonymous said...
Any post coming forward soon about the Orlando screeners at MCO who abused a transgender passenger?

Were they following TSA's procedures?

September 23, 2015 at 12:12 AM"
--------------------------------
How was the passenger abused? Passenger presented as a female so the female form was selected on the AIT. Female showed an anomaly in the groin area. Female stated she had a male organ so passenger was asked if she wanted to be screened as a male on the AIT or get a pat down. Passenger objected to being patted down be either a male or a female. Sorry - Not only was there no abuse, but the TSOs tried the best they could to accommodate this person. Unfortunately there is no AIT setting for "other".

Susan Richart said...

"How was the passenger abused? Passenger presented as a female so the female form was selected on the AIT. Female showed an anomaly in the groin area. Female stated she had a male organ so passenger was asked if she wanted to be screened as a male on the AIT or get a pat down. Passenger objected to being patted down be either a male or a female. Sorry - Not only was there no abuse, but the TSOs tried the best they could to accommodate this person. Unfortunately there is no AIT setting for "other"."

Passenger was detained as shown in the photo on the victim's Twitter account; passenger was told not to take pictures or use her phone; she was told to leave the airport by the TSA; passenger was treated with utmost disrespect.

But, of course, the TSA always blames the victim and never does anything wrong.

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Susan Richart said...

SkyWayManAz wrote:

"[']Supervisory personnel and a Passenger Support Specialist participated in the screening to ensure guidelines were met,['] he said in a statement." "

When a supervisor and a "passenger support specialist" need to be present to "ensure guidelines were met" then it means that guidelines often are NOT met by screeners as evidenced by this article,

http://www.travelpulse.com/opinions/column/tsa-needs-to-change-mindset-not-policy.html

TSA screeners didn't even know the guidelines for screening a transgender person.

"“The TSA agents were kind of arguing with each other about process,” Petosky told the New York Times."

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

SSSS for Some Reason said...

"...How was the passenger abused? "

The fact that you have to ask that question makes you part of the problem.

What sex the passenger is, or wants to be, has nothing to do with the security of the travelling public. Unless or until you can explain otherwise the TSA is in the wrong on this one.

Anonymous said...

"Unfortunately there is no AIT setting for "other""

Of course, there's absolutely no reason for TSA to be using slow, invasive, and ineffective naked body scanners. They have a 100% false positive rate - they've never, ever, ever found a dangerous object but lead to many thousands of needless physical searches like this one. So why does TSA keep using them? Grown-ups admit their mistakes and try to make up for them. TSA's more like a petulant child trying to fit a round block into a square hole. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
How was the passenger abused?

"Johnson, who identifies as a transgender man, was immediately asked to walk through the body scanner and then pulled aside and asked to remove his chest binder and then his prosthetic penis, in plain view of everyone else at the checkpoint, if he wanted to board his plane." - http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/23/tsa-agents-transgender-people-trauma

That's how.

RB said...

The question on the abusive screening by TSA of a transgender person raises a much bigger question.

TSA is authorized to search for Weapons, Explosives, and Incendiaries.

TSA is not authorized to search for genitalia.

And this screening using the Strip Search Machine proves once again that the machine does not detect WEI.

Anonymous said...

Finding one gun, Dragonflower, did nothing to stop terrorism because the gun wasn't owned by a terrorist.
how on earth can you possibly know this? Did the police ask " are you a terrorist?" and the passenger said no?
Like he would really answer yes... Come on. there is absolutely know way to know if any of the people who bring guns to a checkpoint have ill intent. They are not interviewed save for a very few cases. In most cases, the local police take the gun, issue a citation and the passenger goes on his merry way. Nobody is a terrorist until they commit the act. By then its too late. Remember, had the 9-11 terrorist had their box cutters taken, nobody would have ever known the largest terror attack in history was prevented. Perhaps a second attack has been prevented by taking away a gun from someone who is "not a terrorist."

Anonymous said...

That doesn't explain why she wasn't rescanned as a man and sent on her way. Except that we all know TSA policy encourages molestation instead of common sense. Groping confirms something is there a woman should not have and off the rails we go.
really? you cant figure this out? If a women comes in the AIT and gets a groin anomaly you think they should just rescan her as a man? So a women comes in and gets her groin anomaly says she is a man, gets rescreened and the same anomaly appears. Or they scan her as a man and the machine thinks she is a man so there is no anomaly. turns out her man parts was 5lbs of C4. I don't think so. No, you don't resort to a different type of screening to eliminate alarms. Machines alarm for a reason and that reason must be verified. That would be like covering up your low oil light on your car rather than checking your oil.

Anonymous said...

But, of course, the TSA always blames the victim and never does anything wrong.
and you and the others always blame TSA who never does anything right. Its a 2 way street. Just admit it, you hate TSA and in your mind they will always be wrong and a passenger can never lie. go ahead...you can say it...we all know how you feel. Of course that would imply you have a prejudice towards TSA and would essentially invalidate any argument. You see , in order to be taken seriously, you have to take an honest look at everything presented before reaching a logical conclusion. There is no way TSA can be wrong 100% of the time as you believe. When on sides with one side 100% of the time, their credibility is invalid and they are looked at as a whiner and a complainer rather than an objective person with real concerns. Some would call it closed minded, other would call it ignorant.

Wintermute said...

So, what you're saying is, a flat-cested female terrorist can say she's a man, pack c4 down the front of her pants, and get right through the nude-o-scope with no alarm, since she identified as male. Good thing terrorists haven't thought of that. Or maybe they aren't targeting aviation.

SSSS for Some Reason said...

"... You see , in order to be taken seriously, you have to take an honest look at everything presented before reaching a logical conclusion. "

You see, its hard to take you or anyone else at the TSA seriously because none of you have ever taken an honest look at everything presented and reached a logical conclusion.

We get it, you support your employer, you are loyal employee. Good on you.

The rest of us, however, are deeply suspicious of an agency that thinks that 18 ounces of liquids suddenly become safe by virtue of being contained it wee little bottles in a zippy bag. We are deeply suspicious of an agency that thinks your name is somehow important to the security screening process, even more suspicious when there is absolutely NO way for your agency to confirm anything other than the name on my id and the name on my ticket match. And the suspicion grows again with the realization that your agency thinks the gender of a passenger is relevant in any way to the security of the aircraft.

Anonymous said...

Bold-faced TSA cheerleader said:

and you and the others always blame TSA who never does anything right. Its a 2 way street. Just admit it, you hate TSA and in your mind they will always be wrong and a passenger can never lie. go ahead...you can say it...we all know how you feel. Of course that would imply you have a prejudice towards TSA and would essentially invalidate any argument. You see , in order to be taken seriously, you have to take an honest look at everything presented before reaching a logical conclusion. There is no way TSA can be wrong 100% of the time as you believe. When on sides with one side 100% of the time, their credibility is invalid and they are looked at as a whiner and a complainer rather than an objective person with real concerns. Some would call it closed minded, other would call it ignorant.

Aww, it's so CUTE when your fits of rage stress your already-tenuous grasp of the English language! And your willingness to lecture TSA critics about the finer points of logic-- by gosh, you are ADORABLE when you engage in classic psychological projection, TSAnonymous!