Friday, April 22, 2016

TSA Week in Review: A Record Breaking 73 Firearms Discovered in Carry-on Bags This Week - 68 Loaded

Discovered 73 firearms

A record breaking seventy-three firearms were discovered this week in carry-on bags around the nation. Of the 73 firearms discovered, 68 were loaded and 27 had a round chambered. All of the firearms pictured were discovered last week. See a complete list below. The previous record of 68 firearms was set in October of 2015.


Discovered two replica military rounds
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 board the aircraft. Two replica military rounds (pictured) were discovered in a checked bag at Tucson (TUS).


Discovered knives
Clockwise from the top, these items were discovered at the following airports: MGW, JFK, JFK, BWI, BNA, PVD and BWI
Discovered 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 ammunition pictured was discovered in a checked bag at HYS.




In addition to all of the other prohibited items we find weekly in carry-on bags, our officers also regularly find firearm components, realistic replica firearms, bb and pellet guns, airsoft guns, brass knuckles, ammunition, batons, stun guns, small pocketknives and many other prohibited items too numerous to note.




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.






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 2015 Year in Review post! If you haven’t read them yet, make sure you check out our year in review posts for 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014.



Follow @TSA on Twitter and Instagram!



Bob Burns
TSA Social Media Team

56 comments:

Anonymous said...

Those caught with a Fire Arm in Carry on should be arrested immediately. Everyone knows you can't carry a gun on a plane. It should come to no surprise to them.
And bill them with a very high fine to cover costs incurred.

Ciaran O'Malley said...

Once again you're highlighting the fact that your outreach efforts regarding firearms have been completely ineffective. I don't understand you people.

People caught with firearms at TSA checkpoints are slapped with civil penalties, usually monetary, or they are arrested (depends upon the jurisdiction). Despite all this, you have consistently seen an increase in firearms found at checkpoints over the past several years, per your own data. You need to find a new medium.

Anonymous said...

I'm fine with someone carrying a gun on the plane as long as me and everyone else has one. It levels the playing field. I'm sure there are more good guys than bad guys on a plane. Why is it just airplanes they think terrorist target? There are more public places to do damage that doesn't have security checks and do not follow "gun free" zone rules. It's all hype. Keep that fear rolling....

Jud Hanson said...

I agree with "Anonymous." The "I didn't know" or "Oops" lines shouldn't be accepted anymore. A firearm should bring an automatic fine; a loaded firearm should bring arrest, fines and criminal charges.

Anonymous said...

After so much has happened, week after week people continue to attempt to carry firearms and other prohibited items aboard an aircraft. Trying the nice and understanding approach is not working. Your policy should be changed. You will eventually have to arrest or detain those types of travelers who also need to be fined. .

RB said...

 Anonymous said...Those caught with a Fire Arm in Carry on should be arrested immediately. Everyone knows you can't carry a gun on a plane. It should come to no surprise to them. And bill them with a very high fine to cover costs incurred.April 23, 2016 at 1:36 AM
?..........?

Cover what cost?

Are you against Due Process and having a person stand before a jury of their peers to detrrmine guilt? Seems to me that government should honor the United States Constitution, as Amended, which codifies the right to be armed!

Are you also against the laws of the United States? That would make you something much worse than some guy who forgot they had their firearm with them.

I think the bigger point is how TSA claims their screeners and Body Scanners act like a deterrent. That claim just doesn't seem to hold water.

Anonymous said...

Did the big fancy nudie scanners find anything this week? Or was it all stuff found with the plain old walk-through metal detectors?

Fix the TSA said...

Bob, there are so many problems with the gun montage this week.

Start with the center purple blast photo in the middle of the montage. Are you seriously expecting us to believe this is an actual photo of an actual gun found this past week?

The top row, third photo from the right has a partially cut off date written in blue marker. It looks like 2016-04-01 (or four?). The day portion of the date definitely is not starting with a 1 or a 2. This photo appears to not have been taken the week of April 22, 2016, which contradicts your statement below the photo.

Five photos down the right side of the montage are all cut off.

The fourth row, third photo from the right (light pink gun)'s date stamp is very distorted and could have been tampered with by Bob or a screener at the airport location.

Fourth row, third from left photo has the date stamp cut off.

First row, fourth from right, the date stamp may have been tampered with because it is unusually light and distorted. Could be April, could be June?

You once again, Bob, just named the file "guns." This is definitely an improvement from the many, many times you put commas, add signs, spaces, etc. in the file title, but guns is too generic to be useful in any proper file management system.


As for the pen photo, you expect us to believe that screeners couldn't tell a souvenir pen from a bullet? What was the exact size of this unrealistic replica (which by your own rules should have been allowed)?

The second row, second from left photo in the knife montage is from April 15, 2016. That date is not last week (April 17 - 22, 2016). Therefore it does not comply with your statement that all photos were from this past week.

Regarding the ammunition photo, was the passenger given the option of going back and checking in the ammunition or was it confiscated?

Anonymous said...

It seems people are less afraid of getting caught with a gun than without one. As for the comment regarding "not just planes", the aircraft itself is such a volatile weapon, one should understand why the concern, but a box truck full of fertilizer can be almost as deadly, so I do see the point. Regarding leveling the playing field, there are many folks I would not trust with a firearm out of concern that they'll hurt themselves...but again, a license to carry a firearm comes with stern warnings and requirements, and with proper training and ammunition, should be legal regardless of it's current location...in my opinion.

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...

There is the possibility of arrest and up to $11000 fine. Did you read the article?

SSSS for Some Reason said...

Were any of these firearms or other items found in anyone's hair?

Just asking, you seem to track every other measure of the find, and your recent article mentioned hair specifically so it seems a simple question to answer.....

Anonymous said...

Why long lines? The reason is manifold. 1. In my experience about 15% to 20% of people think they do not need to arrive at the airport 2 hours early. This mistake causes chaos at the checkpoint, for instance people cutting into line because they are going to miss their flight. 2. Many passengers DO NOT listen to the announcements to help them get through security. The Officers are there to help you, listen to them. 3. Passengers bring too many bags with them. You are allowed 1 carry-on and 1 personal item, that is it! I see so many bags that belong to one passenger. Just last week I saw while I was traveling, one passenger who had 6 bags, and her purse. This slows up the lines more than anything. 4. Know what you can bring on the aircraft with you. This is probably the second most line slow up out there. Do you remember “Liquids may be carried onto the aircraft as long as they are 3.4 oz or less inside a clear, 1 qt ziptop baggie”, stop bringing on the knives and guns. I have many more items I could bring up, I’ll save them for later.

Now I will admit, TSA is short staffed, but it is NOT all there fault.

Second Amendment Supporter said...

@Ciaran O'Malley and a few of the Anons...

Airports have been screening for weapons since January 1973, when metal detectors became mandatory. That's 43 years!!!! It's not "efforts of the TSA have failed", it's the decrease in the IQ of the American public. I'm retired military and an ardent 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution supporter. That being said, I think anyone who's stupid enough to carry a weapon into any airport should be convicted of a federal felony so that they lose their rights to own a weapon. (State felons do too, but it really should be a federal law.) I've managed not to do it as a frequent flyer, why can't an otherwise abiding (I hope) American remember not to?

ramroddoc said...

In Georgia we have been legal able to carry a personal firearm/weapon in the non-sterile areas of our airports for years, with no ill effect. In 2013 Atlanta was number one for "confiscated firearms" and used as a talking point by the opposition of HB60 "the guns everywhere" bill that passed.

HB60 provides if someone enters the sterile area, with a firearm and a valid carry permit, no ill intent, they will be asked to leave and secure their firearm.

No mention of the number of firearms "confiscated" after HB60's passage and effect on the numbers. I did note the verbiage of guns "discovered" rather than "confiscated".

Creating criminals over a victimless crime by government dictate serves no honest public interest. The far majority of people "discovered" with a firearm in these areas were never a threat to public safety if one bothers to research the details of vetted, permitted, weapons carriers.

Susan Richart said...

"Went through TSA Precheck line at --- on Friday evening with half a bottle of Coke Zero in my bag...."

"I went through a PreCheck line today with a torch lighter, 5 packs of matches, and two cigar cutters. Total menace to aviation"

Two reports of "contraband" getting through 2 airports in just a couple of days. How much more got through the "strong security" that AskTSA crows about in a feeble attempt to justify the continuing long lines? Seems that security isn't so "strong" after all.

screen shot/DHS IG statement

Anonymous said...

"Why long lines?"

You missed the real reason - TSA's insistence on using slow, invasive, and ineffective screening technology that requires thousands of people to be physically searched thanks to false alarms. In fact, TSA's naked body scanners produce nothing BUT false positives, and have never resulted in the detection of anything dangerous that a metal detector would not have found more easily.

This is why West Cooper and Curtis Burns refuse to answer questions about false positives, right, boys?

GSOLTSO said...

ramroddoc sez - "No mention of the number of firearms "confiscated" after HB60's passage and effect on the numbers. I did note the verbiage of guns "discovered" rather than "confiscated"."

The use of the phrasing "Discovered" is because TSA only discovers the weapons, we do not "confiscate". Local LEOs are the ones that determine disposition after the fact. Whenever a firearm (or parts) are discovered, TSA contacts the local LEO and they take control of the situation and the item(s). This means that confiscation or any other final disposition of the item(s) is solely up to the local LEOs.

West
TSA Blog Team

RB said...

Another account of the lack of professionalism at TSA. Is it any wonder that the TSA grunts act the way they do when TSA's so-called management is so flawed?

But the agency’s own Office of Intelligence and Analysis, plagued by near-constant turnover at its top levels and often in turmoil, has struggled to reach its potential, insiders say. The office’s track record includes leadership battles that have fostered a toxic culture, produced intelligence that frequently is of little value and mishandled classified information that jeopardized the agency’s direct access to useful intelligence, interviews with current and former intelligence officials, court records and other documents show.

Life inside TSA’s intelligence office

RB said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Why long lines? The reason is manifold. 1. In my experience about 15% to 20% of people think they do not need to arrive at the airport 2 hours early. This mistake causes chaos at the checkpoint, for instance people cutting into line because they are going to miss their flight. 2. Many passengers DO NOT listen to the announcements to help them get through security. The Officers are there to help you, listen to them. 3. Passengers bring too many bags with them. You are allowed 1 carry-on and 1 personal item, that is it! I see so many bags that belong to one passenger. Just last week I saw while I was traveling, one passenger who had 6 bags, and her purse. This slows up the lines more than anything. 4. Know what you can bring on the aircraft with you. This is probably the second most line slow up out there. Do you remember “Liquids may be carried onto the aircraft as long as they are 3.4 oz or less inside a clear, 1 qt ziptop baggie”, stop bringing on the knives and guns. I have many more items I could bring up, I’ll save them for later.

Now I will admit, TSA is short staffed, but it is NOT all there fault.

April 26, 2016 at 5:16 PM

..................
The reason for the long lines is TSA incompetence. Nothing other than!!

The new 2 hour recommendation is just TSA lowering the TSA Performance Bar.

TSA's motto: If TSA can't meet the standards then lower the standards.

Susan Richart said...

West, regarding confiscations, one of your "higher ups" says differently:

"“All we’re permitted to do is confiscate the weapon and call law enforcement agents, who then will take custody of it and determine whether or not you’re arrested,” said Mr. Castelveter, who is part of the security agency’s effort to notify local news media to aggressively publicize reports of guns and other prohibited weapons being found at checkpoints."

Even the lovely Lisa says: "All have been confiscated from travelers screened at TSA checkpoints, Lisa Farbstein, TSA spokeswoman at the airport, said Thursday afternoon."

screen shot/DHS IG statement

Fix the TSA said...

Minnesota TSA Manager Says He Was Told to Target Somali-Americans

New York Times article about the supervisor of the assistant FSD in Minneapolis telling the AFSD to racially profile visitors to the local TSA office.

Got a comment, blog team?

GSOLTSO said...

Susan sez - "West, regarding confiscations, one of your "higher ups" says differently:"

Then the individual is not correct in terminology or phrasing. TSA does not confiscate anything - if there are firearms or dangerous items, we are not even supposed to touch the items, merely maintain control of the bag with the item(s) and contact the LEOs. The disposition of the item afterwards is completely up to the local LEOs - confiscation may happen, but it will be done by the local LEOs, not TSA.


Fix sez - "Got a comment, blog team?"

No.

West
TSA Blog Team

Susan Richart said...

West says:

"Then the individual is not correct in terminology or phrasing."

So you are telling two people with far more responsibility and far higher up the organization chart that they are wrong.

Why am I not surprised that you would say that?

screen shot/DHS OIG statement

Anonymous said...

The long lines are a combination of many things. As mentioned, people bring way too many carry on bags does not help. Also, when the officers are instructing people to remove liquids/gels/pastes/creams, laptops, empty pockets, etc., and are not listened to, it will slow down the process. As far as "false positives" from the scanners, they are designed to find objects that are not part of a "normal" body contour. This includes paper, wallets, combs, pills, mints, etc. The scanner doesn't discern whether or not it is a knife, gun, it just knows there is something there that does not belong. It does not matter what it is made of. The shortage of staff makes it even worse. If people would do a little bit of research before they fly, and ensure they are not carrying prohibited items, they would get in and out of the process in no time.

Wintermute said...

Of course not. TSA doesn't even have the blog under their PR arm, so you CAN'T comment until it's gone through official channels.

GSOLTSO said...

Susan sez - "So you are telling two people with far more responsibility and far higher up the organization chart that they are wrong."

In this case, with respect to the terminology and/or phrasing they are using, yes.

I will state it as clearly as possible - TSA does not confiscate, there are several options available when an item is prohibited - with certain items that we call for the local LEOs on (firearms, explosives, etc). If a passenger chooses not to take advantage of the options available to them to retain possession of the item(s), then there is the option to voluntarily abandon/surrender the item to TSA for disposal.

Wintermute sez - "Of course not. TSA doesn't even have the blog under their PR arm, so you CAN'T comment until it's gone through official channels."

I would not comment on ongoing investigations/inquiries, or possible investigations/inquiries, even if we had published information regarding things like what is included in the link.

West
TSA Blog Team

Wintermute said...

In regards to confiscations, what you describe is SUPPOSED to happen. In many cases, it does not.

Susan Richart said...

As I said, your arrogance does not surprise me, West.

Fix the TSA said...

West, thank-you for confirming twice that the TSA blog team does not represent nor even appear to be part of the TSA communications teams. This blog team is like the ignored little guy in the basement of the office building, playing at "telling it like it is".

One: you replied with a one word sentence when I asked for a comment, i.e. more information, about an article on racism and racial profiling in a US airport by lead airport TSA personnel. If the FSD is telling his staff to racially profile people visiting the airport's TSA office, we Americans must assume all screeners at MSP are being told, directly or indirectly, to racially profile people of color and immigrants. This is a serious legal and Constitutional issue, and all West can come up with is "No." Then when called on that by another commenter, all you say is, "I would not comment on ongoing investigations/inquiries, or possible investigations/inquiries, even if we had published information regarding things like what is included in the link."

So even if the TSA had published information, you wouldn't refer a US citizen to those published comments? You refuse to provide ANY assistance or guidance to official comments on a serious TSA issue? What is the use of this blog?

#TSAFail.

Second, when a head of TSA public relations and one of the long-time TSA public relations employees clearly use the term "confiscate" regarding TSA confiscation of weapons, you say multiple times that they are wrong. I noted you didn't mention David Castelveter (‎Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Strategic Communications & Public Affairs at TSA) and Lisa Farbstein (TSA Public Affairs spokesperson) by name in your replies.

#TSABlogFail.


*screenshot*

Anonymous said...

"Also, when the officers are instructing people to remove liquids/gels/pastes/creams, laptops, empty pockets, etc., and are not listened to, it will slow down the process. "

TSApologists keep repeating this as if they're making some sort of point, and ignore the fact that many thousands of travelers use private medical devices - ostomy bags, breast and other prosthetics, insulin pumps - that will always alarm, always have to be cleared via an invasive physical search, and never pose any danger at all to anyone, anywhere. It's not that stupid travelers aren't listening to the screaming screening clerks, it's that the rules that the clerks are screaming about don't make anyone safer, don't make any sense, and don't work. And for added insult, there are plenty of us who said, back when the naked body scanners were in the planning stages, that this won't work - they'll cause terrible slowdowns and privacy problems and TSA went ahead and did it anyway. Pathetic.

Anonymous said...

I do wonder why so many have issues with checkpoints, full body scanners, individual re-scans etc. Personally I am for all scans. Honest people are kept honest, maniac's are looked for constantly and hopefully always thwarted, and God willing, any terrorist never finds a way onto the plane. Regarding the body scanners...I wonder if people realize they are in black and white and the personnel are not looking at the goods...they're looking for guns, knives, suspicious areas. I have much metal in my body, the metal in my back throws off a shadow that is difficult to make out. I'm always re-scanned and I do not feel assaulted in any way at all. In fact I feel more secure that they re-scan because they cannot see the area clearly. I welcome the double check, heck, triple check if you have to. Just what I believe in.

Marijan Favetti said...

That 73 guns were found and many were loaded doesn't prove anything, how many of those belonged to legally licensed American citizens who just forgot they were there? I seem to recall that breast milk was found and had to be disposed of, what did that prove? The TSA seemingly loves to ignore the number of weapons that got by them in various tests. How many "hi-jacking's" have been prevented in the past 10 years and how many hours of wasted time were logged needlessly?

GSOLTSO said...

GSOLTSO sez above - "with certain items that we call for the local LEOs on (firearms, explosives, etc)"

Apparently I managed to delete part of this sentence. It was supposed to be "with exceptions for certain items that we call the local LEOs on (firearms, explosives, etc)."

Sorry for the miskey.

West
TSA Blog Team

GSOLTSO said...

Fix sez - "West, thank-you for confirming twice that the TSA blog team does not represent nor even appear to be part of the TSA communications teams. This blog team is like the ignored little guy in the basement of the office building, playing at "telling it like it is"."

You are welcome, although, I do not remember saying anything even remotely like that.

Fix also sez - "So even if the TSA had published information, you wouldn't refer a US citizen to those published comments? You refuse to provide ANY assistance or guidance to official comments on a serious TSA issue? What is the use of this blog?"

I never said I would not refer them to information published on it, I said I had no comment on it, and would not comment on it - big difference.

Fix also sez - "Second, when a head of TSA public relations and one of the long-time TSA public relations employees clearly use the term "confiscate" regarding TSA confiscation of weapons, you say multiple times that they are wrong."

I have merely reiterated exactly what we have been saying since I started here at the Blog, that TSA does not confiscate, and anyone else using that particular turn of phrase is wrong in their terminology.

West
TSA Blog Team

RB said...

It appears that TSA at MSP is racially profiling while missing 9 out of 12 Red Team test objects.

Comments TSA Bloggers?

And how about TSA's fine Denver STSO who tells a passenger that he knows the rules and all the other airports are doing it wrong while abusing this passenger.

Is this how TSA tries to win the support of the public? How about a comment on this current event item TSA Bloggers.

Edwin Clements said...

They need to have some way of dealing with this when somebody innocently forgets that they have have one of these "prohibited" items. Example: a couple of years ago, I was going somewhere, and when I got to the airport, I remembered that I had a Swiss Army Knife in my pocket, which I carry with me about all the time. Back before 9/11, I went on many flights and put it in the bowl and sent it through the x-ray machine, and then got it back and took it with me on the flight. No problem. But now I can't do that. So what I am going to do if I get there and have it? They're going to take it away from me? It cost $33, and losing it for this kind of reason does not make me a happy camper. They should have some way of putting it in a box or something and mailing it to me if they do not want to let me take it on the plane. In this case, however, I called a friend of mine who worked at the airport, and he got hold of another friend who worked at the airport and was working at the time, and got her to let me give it to her and they got it back to me after I got back from the trip. But I still think a lot of this is not necessary.

Anonymous said...

"I do wonder why so many have issues with checkpoints, full body scanners, individual re-scans etc."

We have issues with the scanners because they're slow, invasive, don't work, and 100% of the "alarms" are false positives - the scanners reacting to absolutely nothing, or to things that are harmless, like pleats, zippers, or private medical devices. Also because TSA has lied about them from day one.

Fix the TSA said...

West, I don't "sez" anything, and the continued use of childish wording by government employees on a government website does not help your cause.

You stated, "I would not comment on ongoing investigations/inquiries, or possible investigations/inquiries, even if we had published information regarding things like what is included in the link."

And then you counter my comment with, "I never said I would not refer them to information published on it, I said I had no comment on it, and would not comment on it - big difference."

You don't have a history of replying much at all, less with links to published information when commenters ask about the latest TSA scandal. You would have a much better argument if you actually did provide information, rather than one-word negative comments.

Also, replies here are called "comments", so not really a "big difference."

Wintermute said...

Actually, West, you said you wouldn't comment even if TSA had published information on it.

Anonymous said...

I can only but wonder, that if 73 are detected; how many are not detected noting the failure of covert testing at stated US airports.

Wintermute said...

So, basically, you handed off your item that is so dangerous that is can't fly to an insider... Good thing the TSA screens all airport employees so they still caught it, since it was so dangerous... Oh wait, they don't and you got it back? Good thing it was only a knife ;)

GSOLTSO said...

Wintermute sez - "Actually, West, you said you wouldn't comment even if TSA had published information on it. "

Correct, and exactly true statement - original comment "I would not comment on ongoing investigations/inquiries, or possible investigations/inquiries, even if we had published information regarding things like what is included in the link."

Meaning I would have no commentary on an ongoing investigation (or possible ongoing investigation) - which is the norm. Giving out a link, or directing someone to read the official releases is not "commenting", it is directing someone to officially released information, again, big difference.

West
TSA Blog Team

Fix the TSA said...

West, you can call it a "big difference" all you want, but you're still wrong.

I appreciate the clarification about "comments" versus "directing someone", and will be certain to request links or more information, not comments by you, Bob, or Lynn, about the multitude of scandals, corrupt practices, and criminal activities perpetrated by TSA employees.

Wintermute said...

This is why I lost all respect for you, West. You play word games with the best. You know that anything you post here, even a link, is a "comment."

Anonymous said...

Went through TSA Precheck line at --- on Friday evening with half a bottle of Coke Zero in my bag...." the officer may have deemed it to be less that 3.4oz. Perfectly OK on precheck

"I went through a PreCheck line today with a torch lighter, 5 packs of matches, and two cigar cutters. Total menace to aviation" with the exception of the torch lighter, the items are perfectly acceptable.

Two reports of "contraband" getting through 2 airports in just a couple of days. How much more got through the "strong security" that AskTSA crows about in a feeble attempt to justify the continuing long lines? Seems that security isn't so "strong" after all. the real question is how many planes were overtaken by terrorists? The answer is zero.

GSOLTSO said...

Wintermute sez - "This is why I lost all respect for you, West. You play word games with the best. You know that anything you post here, even a link, is a "comment."


Since traditional vernacular seems to be out of use here, let me make the statement as clear as I possibly can -

I will have no commentary, or opinion to give on anything that is deemed an ongoing investigation, or appears that it will become an ongoing investigation.

If the organization posts information in an official capacity (say like a press release or a blog post), I will probably post links to it if there are questions, but I will still not post any commentary or opinion about the situation as long as it is an ongoing investigation or appears likely to become an investigation.


West
TSA Blog Team

Wintermute said...

In other words, you can't comment, which is what I said to begin with. :/

Wintermute said...

And? You're agreeing that no planes overtaken *despite* TSA not doing their jobs well? Seems the TSA is a waste, then.

Fix the TSA said...

Wrong, Bold TSApologist. You don't know TSA policy like you always claim. The container must not be largeer than 3.4oz. It doesn't matter if the liquids amount is under 3.4oz, if the container holds more, it is routinely confiscated by TSA screeners.

Fix the TSA said...

West, we'll you only post links to official TSA press releases when requested by citizens? The blog team will never independently post a TSA press release or link on this blog without insistence from the American public?

Anonymous said...

Wrong, Bold TSApologist. You don't know TSA policy like you always claim. The container must not be largeer than 3.4oz. It doesn't matter if the liquids amount is under 3.4oz, if the container holds more, it is routinely confiscated by TSA screeners.
Sorry Sir, you are incorrect. If a larger container is deemed to be mostly empty on precheck, it is allowed.
You guys really need to do your research before coming on here and sounding like...
Well, you need to make sure you know what you're talking about. Perhaps rather than criticizing TSA employees all day long, you should talk to them and see what you can learn from them. Most of them are great people willing to give you proper and accurate information. After all, when you know the rules, their jobs become easier and those hated lines go faster.

Anonymous said...

Boldy posted "... If a larger container is deemed to be mostly empty on precheck, it is allowed.

Well, you might allow it through on your shift but that isn't the same as saying a mostly empty container is ok to go. The nice Agent with the blue gloves screaming at people in line the whole hour I was in line said sixteen times that if the container is more than three ounces take it out of the bag now and throw it way or put it in checked baggage because it will not be allowed through no exceptions.

After all, when you make up the rules as you go along, no one takes you seriously and you lose credibility faster.

Fix the TSA said...

Boldy, many, many times people have clearly stated that TSA screeners have confiscated their liquids that were in larger containers, even if the liquid amount is less than 3.4 oz.

The rule, as stated by screeners is that the bottle size MUST be 3.4oz or less.

If your friend or family member who is a TSA screener lets you through with larger bottles, that is not the norm.

Fix the TSA said...

Hey Boldy, read your department's website: tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/liquids-rule

Vicki Nikolaidis said...

Thanks for the update, it is always a shock. Transportation security people are at high risk it looks like to me.