The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
Top Ten TSA Catches of 2011 https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8050 |
Page 1 of 5 |
Author: | Vindicarre [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | Top Ten TSA Catches of 2011 |
TSA Blog Quote: 10) Snakes, turtles, and birds were found at Miami (MIA) and Los Angeles (LAX). I’m just happy there weren’t any lions, tigers, and bears… 9) A science project shut down a checkpoint at Omaha (OMA). I wonder if mentioning the shutting down of the checkpoint added enough flare to his presentation to score him some bonus points? 8) An artfully concealed non-metallic martial arts weapon called a “Tactical Spike” was found in the sock of a passenger at Pensacola (PNS) after being screened by a body scanner. The only thing I keep in my sock is my foot. 7) Inert landmines were found at Salt Lake City (SLC). I always travel with mine, don’t you??? 6) A stun gun disguised as a smart phone was found at Los Angeles (LAX). Not very smart to travel with this stunning device. 5) A flare gun with seven flares was found in a passenger’s carry-on bag at Norfolk (ORF). Hmmm… pressurized cabin + 7 live flares = no good can come from this. 4) Two throwing knives concealed in hollowed out book were found at Washington National (DCA). Killer book… 3) Over 1,200 firearms were discovered at TSA checkpoints across the nation in 2011. Many guns are found loaded with rounds in the chamber. Most passengers simply state they forgot they had a gun in their bag. 2) A loaded .380 pistol was found strapped to passenger’s ankle with the body scanner at Detroit (DTW). You guessed it, he forgot it was there… 1) Small chunks of C4 explosives were found in passenger’s checked luggage in Yuma (YUM). Believe it or not, he was brining it home to show his family. Hmmm, that's their top ten? That's $1.2 billion, ummm, well spent. The 1,200 guns? I can only imagine the amount that get through and no one talks about. The Economist Quote: AMERICA's Transportation Security Administration was under fire again this week—this time for letting a passenger with a loaded .40 caliber handgun waltz right through airport security and onto a plane. Houston's KTRK (which I can only assume is Houston's news leader) had the story first. Before I go any further, the TSA's "Blogger Bob" would probably like me to note that the incident in question took place last year. A lot of the follow-up coverage has missed that point. (The BoingBoing post describing screeners as too busy "ogling" the passenger's penis to notice the gun, for example.) But now, in the wake of the "Don't Touch My Junk" controversy, almost any story about airport security can go viral—even if it's a year old. People will see this story and talk about it, so it matters, and we're going to cover it. Anyway, here's what happened: a Houston businessman named Farid Seif (more on that in a minute) made it through screening at Houston's George Bush Intercontinental airport last Christmas with a Glock .40 caliber handgun in his carry-on luggage. He didn't realise he had the weapon until he arrived at his destination, where he immediately reported the incident to security officials. Mr Seif says there was "nothing else" in his carry-on besides the weapon. Yet the screeners at America's eighth-busiest airport missed it entirely. But here's the really scary part (via KTRK): Authorities tell ABC News the incident is not uncommon, but how often it occurs is a closely guarded government secret. Experts say every year since the September 11 attacks, federal agencies have conducted random, covert tests of airport security.A person briefed on the latest tests tells ABC News the failure rate approaches 70 percent at some major airports. Two weeks ago, TSA's new director said every test gun, bomb part or knife got past screeners at some airports. Oh, and the C-4 was found on the return trip; he got it through the first time. Let's not forget the other brilliant catches: Quote: Did you hear about TSA and the cupcake?
That’s right, two week ago guards in Las Vegas took a frosted cupcake away from a woman named Rebecca Hains as she prepared to board a flight to Boston. The frosting, you see, was “gel-like” and thus a potential security threat. ... TSA confiscates a butter knife from an airline pilot. TSA confiscates a teenage girl’s purse with an embroidered handgun design. TSA confiscates a 4-inch plastic rifle from a GI Joe action doll on the grounds that it’s a “replica weapon.” TSA confiscates a liquid-filled baby rattle from airline pilot’s infant daughter. TSA confiscates a plastic “Star Wars” lightsaber from a toddler. |
Author: | Xequecal [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Top Ten TSA Catches of 2011 |
TSA is largely theater, we know that, that's the point. It's much more important for people to feel safe than actually be safe. People that don't feel safe won't be good consumers and continue to buy airline tickets. Safety measures that would actually work are far too invasive and expensive, and in a lot of cases would actually make people feel less safe. |
Author: | Vindicarre [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:28 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
More expensive how? More invasive than being physically groped at random? More invasive than going through a body scanner that has the stated purpose of seeing through your clothes? Feel less safe how? I know I'd feel much less safe if water bottles were allowed on planes, not to mention cupcakes and baby rattles. |
Author: | Talya [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:29 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Top Ten TSA Catches of 2011 |
Xequecal wrote: Safety measures that would actually work are far too invasive and expensive, and in a lot of cases would actually make people feel less safe. Bullshit. |
Author: | Xequecal [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Vindicarre wrote: More expensive how? More invasive than being physically groped at random? More invasive than going through a body scanner that has the stated purpose of seeing through your clothes? Feel less safe how? I know I'd feel much less safe if water bottles were allowed on planes, not to mention cupcakes and baby rattles. The more intrusive and annoying it is, the safer the average person feels. That's how it works. People believe that the fact that they have to wait two hours in a security line means the TSA MUST be doing a great job checking out everyone - why else would it take so long? If it's behind the scenes, people don't feel safe. It has to be intrusive and annoying. In fact, they'll feel less safe due to the fear that Big Brother is now always watching them. The behind the scenes stuff also invariably involves lots of profiling, which Americans have serious issues with. The "expensive" measures are the ones that are both public and effective, like searching every single bag, or patting down every single passenger. |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | Top Ten TSA Catches of 2011 |
We are patting down (or exraying) every single bag and passenger now. |
Author: | Xequecal [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Top Ten TSA Catches of 2011 |
Rorinthas wrote: We are patting down (or exraying) every single bag and passenger now. I dont mean x-raying or scanning, I mean searching. They did this for awhile in the UK for example after their terrorist attacks, when I flew there I had to empty my carry-on luggage on the floor while they spread it out and picked through everything, and I was patted down by no less than four people for at least a minute. They did this for every passenger on the airplane. I didn't check any bags, but my parents did, and the way everything was crammed back in there when we got them clearly indicated that they emptied them out and searched through everything. This took hours and I don't know how much it must have cost to employ 8 people to do this at the gate, and have enough people on the payroll so that they could do it at every gate with close departure times. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
This is on display whenever I fly out of CLE. More info: Quote: I recently flew out of Cleveland Hopkins Airport and was surprised by the confiscated items on display as I was ushered through the security line. To my amazement, these weren’t all the items confiscated since the airport was founded in 1925 – no, this was a small sample of items confiscated in the last ten years. Now, I’m not the type to be fearful of flying, airports or airport security – and am not posting this to make anyone else fearful – it’s more out of my sheer interest and curiosity in the stories behind these items. I can understand the decorative wedding spatula, the wine key and even the Leatherman being honest mistakes. However, the dynamite, throwing star and grenade are harder to pass off as an honest mistake. I imagine what the excuse for bringing such a carry-on would be. Perhaps, “I’m the Miss Ohio NRA beauty contest winner and this is my beautiful ammo bandolier.” Or, “I’m a method actor auditioning for the role of Chuck Norris in the biographical film ‘The life of Chuck Norris,’ so I carry these nunchucks wherever I go.” This all leads to my question, have you ever had something confiscated by airport security because it may be considered a weapon? http://www.themrsite.com/blog/2010/11/n ... e-at-home/ |
Author: | Hopwin [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:24 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
In all fairness, Cleveland has a Veeeeeerrrry high ninja population. |
Author: | TheRiov [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:26 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
The TSA isn't intended to catch everything that people might carry through security any more than the Highway patrol is intended to stop everyone from speeding. Its a deterrent. |
Author: | Talya [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
And yet, Israel's airports are safer, security more effective, and with far less passenger disruption. And this is in a country where dealing with terrorism is a way of life. |
Author: | TheRiov [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:06 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
because we want to follow Israel's example on things like human & civil rights? |
Author: | Talya [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:07 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
TheRiov wrote: because we want to follow Israel's example on things like human & civil rights? I have no idea, nor do I care. Do we want to follow their example of not eating bacon, as well? Because this is just as related to airport security as their human & civil rights track record (which as far as I understand, is somewhat better lately than America's, anyway.) What we want to follow is their unrelated example of airport security -- where, incidentally, they treat people with MORE respect and give greater accommodation to their rights than we do here. The problem is, people like Xequecal actually have been conditioned to believe there's no way to do real airport security. The TSA's methods are (1) intrusive, degrading, and inconvenient, and (2) utterly ineffective. The ISA's methods are (1) unintrusive, respectful, and painless, and (2) very effective. So why are we using our methods and not theirs? |
Author: | TheRiov [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
you really think they're unrelated? I rather suspect they're just stopping the threats earlier (as in before they get to the airport). Sure they maybe rooting out would-be terrorists, but they're also jailing lots of innocents. |
Author: | Talya [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
TheRiov wrote: you really think they're unrelated? I rather suspect they're just stopping the threats earlier (as in before they get to the airport). Sure they maybe rooting out would-be terrorists, but they're also jailing lots of innocents. Perhaps you're missing the point. They have MORE potential terrorists roaming the streets and trying to hurt Israelis than we do. Yet their security at the airport itself is more effective. It is easier for their problematic residents to play not-so-smart-bomb in a pizza parlor or at a bus stop than to try to get anywhere near an airport. I'm getting the impression you didn't bother reading my link. They do not have less airport security than we do. They have significantly more airport security than we do...it's just better trained and better tasked. Rather than getting walmart rent-a-cops to check your bags for offending water-bottles, they get highly trained security staff to actually look for threats. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:29 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Taly, did you miss the 120+ piece collection of weapons I posted above? All of those would have been on a plane (including the dynamite) without the TSA. I appreciate people don't like the intrusion but it is a balance. |
Author: | Talya [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Hopwin wrote: Taly, did you miss the 120+ piece collection of weapons I posted above? All of those would have been on a plane (including the dynamite) without the TSA. I appreciate people don't like the intrusion but it is a balance. Hopwin, did you miss that the TSA's methods are far less effective than the ISA's less intrusive methods? I'm not saying we should do without any airport security. I'm saying the TSA's methods are horribly ineffective, and terribly inconvenient. The ISA's methods are unintrusive, efficient, and they are harder to slip past/mess up. It is not a tradeoff. We don't have to choose between having security or having convenience. We can have far more of both than we currently have. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Talya wrote: Hopwin wrote: Taly, did you miss the 120+ piece collection of weapons I posted above? All of those would have been on a plane (including the dynamite) without the TSA. I appreciate people don't like the intrusion but it is a balance. Hopwin, did you miss that the TSA's methods are far less effective than the ISA's less intrusive methods? I'm not saying we should do without any airport security. I'm saying the TSA's methods are horribly ineffective, and terribly inconvenient. The ISA's methods are unintrusive, efficient, and they are harder to slip past/mess up. It is not a tradeoff. We don't have to choose between having security or having convenience. We can have far more of both than we currently have. Quote: Despite such tight security, an incident occurred on November 17, 2002 in which a man apparently slipped through airport security at Ben Gurion Airport with a pocketknife and attempted to storm the cockpit of El Al Flight 581 en route from Tel Aviv to Istanbul, Turkey. While no injuries were reported and the attacker was subdued by guards hidden among the passengers 15 minutes before the plane landed safely in Turkey, authorities did shut down Ben Gurion for some time after the attack to reassess the security situation and an investigation was opened to determine how the man, an Israeli Arab, managed to smuggle the knife past the airport security.
|
Author: | Midgen [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Sounds like a success to me. Security training goes beyond searching your bags and x-raying your body. It also involves teaching the crew how to handle incidents like this. That no one was hurt indicates that someones training worked. Taly isn't suggesting that there is no need for airport security. It's that the TSA's training and execution is inferior, inefficient and ineffective comapred with the Israelis. That isn't to say that the Isrealis is perfect, because it obviously isn't, but their track record is pretty good considering the hostile environment they deal with every day. The TSA is a joke. Regarding the items they confiscated, how many of those belonged to someone who actually intended to do harm (as opposed to someone who forgot they were carrying their favorite hunting knife or claw hammer)? Probably nearly none of them. |
Author: | Talya [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Hopwin wrote: Quote: Despite such tight security, an incident occurred on November 17, 2002 in which a man apparently slipped through airport security at Ben Gurion Airport with a pocketknife and attempted to storm the cockpit of El Al Flight 581 en route from Tel Aviv to Istanbul, Turkey. While no injuries were reported and the attacker was subdued by guards hidden among the passengers 15 minutes before the plane landed safely in Turkey, authorities did shut down Ben Gurion for some time after the attack to reassess the security situation and an investigation was opened to determine how the man, an Israeli Arab, managed to smuggle the knife past the airport security. That's rather the point, don't you think? They have had one incident total in 10 years, which was successfully averted by their security anyway. The TSA's track record per flight is far less rosy. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Talya wrote: What we want to follow is their unrelated example of airport security -- where, incidentally, they treat people with MORE respect and give greater accommodation to their rights than we do here. El Al has a security budget of $80 million. (2007) (http://nexus.umn.edu/Courses/Cases/CE5212/F2007/CS1/CS1-report.pdf) El Al has approximately 2 million passengers. (2008) (http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/aviation-security-and-the-israeli-model/#more-27215) This equates to $40/passenger. TSA's budget at the same time (same report) was ~$6 billion. In 2008, there were 810 million passengers in the US. (http://www.numberof.net/number-of-airline-passengers-per-year/). That's $7.41/passenger. At $40/passenger, we would need to increase TSA's budget by more than 5 times. Not to mention, redesign our airports. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Top Ten TSA Catches of 2011 |
The praise of the Israeli method relative to the TSA is accurate. The alleged ineffectiveness of the TSA in an absolute sense is nonsense. On a continuum between no security at all and the Israeli method, the TSA is far closer to the latter than the former. It is not "security theater" at all. It does, basically, work. It does not work perfectly, and it is more intrusive, more inconvenient, and less effective than the Israeli method, but pretending that all this money spent has no effect whatsoever is just silliness. As for the cost, the TSA also is apparently cheaper on a per-passanger basis although I'm sure there is a large degree of economy of scale for doing the Israeli method in a much larger country. Still, even if costs only scale up at 50% so it would really cost about $20 per passenger, that's still close to 3 times as expensive as the TSA. |
Author: | Talya [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:09 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
That's rather a consequence of having competent, well-targeted security rather than untrained monkeys randomly grabbing people's crotches and staring at x-ray machines. It costs more. Would you pay an extra $33 a flight to have no hassles and confidence in your security? I would. |
Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:17 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I feel the need to point out, that we're paying a million dollars per confiscated gun for what's estimated at a 70% failure rate. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Top Ten TSA Catches of 2011 |
Well, for one thing we don't have "untrained monkeys randomly grabbing people's crotches and staring at X-ray machines." The only accurate part of your characterization was the "random" part. Yes, I'd like to have more effective, more convenient security. On the other hand, I'd also like to not triple or quadruple the price tag, especially since my estimate of a 50% economy of scale was both a) very generous and b) a complete ass-pull; Israel-style security could end up costing far more than that. |
Page 1 of 5 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |