• TSA failure: Investigators able to smuggle weapons past airport checks in 95 percent of tests
    77 replies, posted
[QUOTE=TestECull;47857072]I say we use it as justification to get rid of the TSA entirely. Not only are they a gross invasion of privacy, but they're an [i]ineffective[/i] gross invasion of privacy. Fuck off, TSA. You are why I refuse to fly. I'd rather take my chances on the interstate than subject myself to such invasive security.[/QUOTE] Uh, honestly the TSA isn't that bad, at least in my experience. I recently started flying semi-regularly (twice every other month or so) and so far I've had zero negative experiences with TSA. 80% of the agents I've dealt with have been very pleasant and kind, the other 20% were just neutral, nobody has been a dick so far. No pat-downs (though I'm an unassuming white male so take from that what you will) and no other issues. I give them my boarding pass and ID, toss my shoes and backpack in the bin, walk through a metal detector and get on my plane. I feel like the TSA was a lot worse before I started flying (from hearing people's accounts of their experience) and they've since cleaned up their act significantly but people are still clinging on to their poor reputation like Internet Explorer or something.
[QUOTE=srobins;47867497]Uh, honestly the TSA isn't that bad, at least in my experience. I recently started flying semi-regularly (twice every other month or so) and so far I've had zero negative experiences with TSA. 80% of the agents I've dealt with have been very pleasant and kind, the other 20% were just neutral, nobody has been a dick so far. No pat-downs (though I'm an unassuming white male so take from that what you will) and no other issues. I give them my boarding pass and ID, toss my shoes and backpack in the bin, walk through a metal detector and get on my plane. I feel like the TSA was a lot worse before I started flying (from hearing people's accounts of their experience) and they've since cleaned up their act significantly but people are still clinging on to their poor reputation like Internet Explorer or something.[/QUOTE] I don't think it has anything to do with "clinging" considering the OP article.
I accidentally brought a swiss army knife on board one time, I didn't notice until I got into the hotel the other end :v:
[QUOTE=srobins;47867497]Uh, honestly the TSA isn't that bad, at least in my experience. I recently started flying semi-regularly (twice every other month or so) and so far I've had zero negative experiences with TSA. 80% of the agents I've dealt with have been very pleasant and kind, the other 20% were just neutral, nobody has been a dick so far. No pat-downs (though I'm an unassuming white male so take from that what you will) and no other issues. I give them my boarding pass and ID, toss my shoes and backpack in the bin, walk through a metal detector and get on my plane. I feel like the TSA was a lot worse before I started flying (from hearing people's accounts of their experience) and they've since cleaned up their act significantly but people are still clinging on to their poor reputation like Internet Explorer or something.[/QUOTE] They can smile and give out free candy, but the searches they conduct are in violation of our founding legal document. The rights so inherent, that there was an argument on if we even needed a bill of rights because we'd already stated the only actions the government could perform. It was decided, however, that just in case, we should, as a people, reserve a selection of rights explicitly so as to ensure that they would never be violated. And yet here we are. Searching every man woman and child because they wish to board a plane, despite hijacking a plane now being virtually impossible and aircraft borne explosives being historically remarkably ineffective and, ON TOP OF THAT, the fact that the searches DON'T EVEN WORK, is the very definition of an unreasonable search. Like if I was trying to come up with a comically bad example of an unreasonable search, I'd have trouble beating this.
Most of them have just a high school degree and can't think for themselves.
[QUOTE=FetusFondler;47870411]I don't think it has anything to do with "clinging" considering the OP article.[/QUOTE] OP's article is an example of TSA being inept and incapable of preventing actual terror threats, which is true and embarrassing, but not an indication of the TSA being unbearable to deal with. If anything it would be an argument for increased security and increased hassle, I get seriously mixed messages from some people on this subject. The TSA is too much security, get rid of it! The TSA isn't enough security, get rid of it! [QUOTE=GunFox;47871023]They can smile and give out free candy, but the searches they conduct are in violation of our founding legal document. The rights so inherent, that there was an argument on if we even needed a bill of rights because we'd already stated the only actions the government could perform. It was decided, however, that just in case, we should, as a people, reserve a selection of rights explicitly so as to ensure that they would never be violated. And yet here we are. Searching every man woman and child because they wish to board a plane, despite hijacking a plane now being virtually impossible and aircraft borne explosives being historically remarkably ineffective and, ON TOP OF THAT, the fact that the searches DON'T EVEN WORK, is the very definition of an unreasonable search. Like if I was trying to come up with a comically bad example of an unreasonable search, I'd have trouble beating this.[/QUOTE] I won't pretend to be an expert on constitutional law. Personally, the idea of walking through a metal detector and having your bag x-ray'd for obvious weaponry seems very reasonable to me before getting on a million dollar tube flying through the air with no way out, next to a bunch of strangers from across the globe. If that's unconstitutional, why not privatize it? I'm not one of those people that thinks every aspect of government should be privatized, but if it really is a constitutional issue, maybe just let airports define their own security standards and let airlines choose only to fly with airports that they consider secure. I don't know. Either way, I'm not trying to debate the merits of the TSA or whether or not they're needed or constitutional in America, all I'm saying is the experience of walking through TSA security has never been a hassle for me thus far, but maybe I'm just a sheeple.
[QUOTE=TestECull;47866263]I refuse to give up my constitutional right to be free from unreasonable search and siezure for a false sense of security I don't even want.[/QUOTE] Guess you don't go to many concerts. Or public events involving politicians. Or sports games. You also seem, like many of the people who invoke the Fourth like a talisman against TSA, to not actually know what the protection against unreasonable search and seizure actually means. It's in regards to arrest and searches for evidence of suspected crimes, not for security measures that you can opt out of by simply walking away and finding another way to travel. I've flown at least ten times in the past year and remain comfortably grope-free. Once I had to get my back patted down. I've seen the readout from the millimeter wave scanner and it doesn't even take a photo like people freak out about, the ATR systems show a generic human silhouette and superimpose red blotches on detected objects. This talk like TSA means cavity searches and nude x-ray pics every time you fly is so ridiculously overblown.
[QUOTE=TestECull;47866263]I refuse to give up my constitutional right to be free from unreasonable search and siezure for a false sense of security I don't even want. I honestly don't give a shit if it's relatively painless most of the time. I simply refuse to allow the TSA to fondle me. For any reason. I'm not afraid of being on a plane that gets hijacked or shot down or whatever and I'm not willing to give up my right to privacy and my right to not be searched unreasonably because some dumbass suburbanites fifteen years ago shit their pants every time someone with a turban walked within twenty yards. Some of the rules are also six kinds of ridiculous. Just bought a can of Dr Pepper from the vending machine within eyesight of the security station? Currently sipping it? DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER IT MIGHT HAVE A BOMB IN IT BWEEWOOBWEEWOOBWEEWOO. Security will shit a brick over that can of Dr Pepper [i]they watched you buy out of the vending machine they probably got their fucking lunch out of two hours earlier[/i] all because that can is 12 ounces. And what, pray tell, if I want to fly with my RC 1/35th KV-2? It's far too fragile for me to entrust it to the baggage handlers, but it has a pair of lead-baring metal tracks and a rather large Nickel-Cadmium battery in the front of the hull that I cannot easily remove. They'd HATE that thing. They can and they should. The TSA is redundant, ineffective and unconstitutional. They do nothing useful and could be replaced with a jovial fat guy that simply goes 'You a terrorist? No? Go right on ahead, sir' with no noticeable decrease in air safety. [url=http://abc13.com/archive/7848683/]People have accidentally slid loaded glocks past these inept fucks[/url] for crying out loud! You want effective security? Pop up a metal detector and a cop from the local PD. A few for each line at busier airports. That's all you need. You don't need a governmental agency that's dedicated to airport security wasting tax dollars like this.[/QUOTE] I love how over-the-top your comments always are. On top of that, you admitted to not actually knowing anything about the TSA beyond second-hand accounts. CATSA (Canada's version of the TSA) and TSA are essentially identical beyond a few minor quibbles (TSA requires shoes off unless you enroll in Precheck, CATSA seems less professional and knowledgeable about their own policies). If you take a road trip into Canada for your flight, you will only be adding a hundred bucks worth of gas, two days worth of driving, and a hotel stay to your travel plans. CATSA's policies are not dissimilar to TSAs. They, too, use full body scanners. They, too, limit you to their version of the 3-1-1 liquid rule. They, too, give pat-downs if you fail the scanner. They, too, force you to remove coats and jackets. The only difference to most travelers is that you don't have to remove most shoes - which you can get around by enrolling in TSA Precheck, in which case you also don't have to remove belts, jewelry, or coats (the same as CATSA's NEXUS program). If you fail a scanner check in the US, chances are you will fail one in Canada as well, in which case you will be "fondled". I fail them all the time (no idea why - I just leave my belt on now since there's no point in taking it off) and all they do is do a very, very quick pat down your back and check your beltline in the back. No fondling involved - only way that would happen is if you're using a chastity device or a buttplug (you're always so uptight that, to be honest, that's not outside the realm of possibility in my mind). It takes maybe 2 seconds. TSA and CATSA treated me the same way in this regard. If you don't want TSA fondling you, why do you not care if CATSA fondles you? The rule of "no liquids past this line" is there for a reason. Yes, it's a stupid reason, but being lax on this rule also subjects us to the discretion of TSA agents. At what point can you bring things you bought from a vending machine before the security checkpoint does it become prohibited? TSA agents are notoriously stupid. The guideline is there because, frankly, they are stupid. It is a simple rule for simple people. If this is seriously such a big fucking problem for you, here's an idea - maybe go through security before spending $3 on a can of Dr. Pepper. Airport terminals are not barren wastelands without food or drink. Your anecdote about your toy tank is also completely irrelevant. What about someone with an antique firearm? Yeah, let's take that carryon, because they are too scared to check it and they didn't have the foresight to ship it beforehand. What kind of situation would necessitate you having a toy tank immediately after you disembark the plane? On top of that, how often do you actually need to bring it with you when you travel? Get real. You mention using cops - in other countries, this is what they often actually do, yes. However, who's to say Johnny Law from the local sheriff's office is going to have the appropriate training? Are you seriously suggesting that the common cop would do any better than a TSA knobhead? TSA folks can hardly find their own dicks, sure, but they at least understand what they're supposed to do when someone leaves a water bottle in their bag. They're standardized and consistent in what they do. Maybe I am spoiled by going through huge airports (DEN, ATL, etc.) but for the hundreds of flights I've taken, I have never once seen anyone actually "felt up" in any sense of the word by TSA. Every pat-down I've seen has been quick and fruitless because TSA agents also realize that there's no point to this. Nobody is hiding a bomb in the wire of their bra. They want to get everyone through as quickly as possible without complaints, because they are infinitely more likely to get shitcanned for grabbing some dude's junk than they are for accidentally letting someone through with a gun. Disclaimer: I am neither for nor against the TSA as an entity itself. I'm only making a point in that you wasting your time in this fruitless crusade against TSA by driving to Canada (which you've likely never done anyway) is something to be left to YouTube comments. [QUOTE=catbarf;47871200]I've flown at least ten times in the past year and remain comfortably grope-free. Once I had to get my back patted down. I've seen the readout from the millimeter wave scanner and it doesn't even take a photo like people freak out about, the ATR systems show a generic human silhouette and superimpose red blotches on detected objects. This talk like TSA means cavity searches and nude x-ray pics every time you fly is so ridiculously overblown.[/QUOTE] Fun fact: TSA used backscatter x-ray and millimeter-wave scanners from 2007 to 2012, at which time the backscatter machines (the ones that actually give a picture instead of a computer-generated "threat map") were removed nationwide.
[QUOTE=catbarf;47871200]Guess you don't go to many concerts. Or public events involving politicians. Or sports games.[/QUOTE] Knowing TestECull, he probably doesn't
[QUOTE=Lord Xenoyia;47870876]I accidentally brought a swiss army knife on board one time, I didn't notice until I got into the hotel the other end :v:[/QUOTE] At least in the US now you can bring the smaller swiss army knives on.
[QUOTE=Snowmew;47871266]I love how over-the-top your comments always are. On top of that, you admitted to not actually knowing anything about the TSA beyond second-hand accounts. CATSA (Canada's version of the TSA) and TSA are essentially identical beyond a few minor quibbles (TSA requires shoes off unless you enroll in Precheck, CATSA seems less professional and knowledgeable about their own policies). If you take a road trip into Canada for your flight, you will only be adding a hundred bucks worth of gas, two days worth of driving, and a hotel stay to your travel plans. CATSA's policies are not dissimilar to TSAs. They, too, use full body scanners. They, too, limit you to their version of the 3-1-1 liquid rule. They, too, give pat-downs if you fail the scanner. They, too, force you to remove coats and jackets. The only difference to most travelers is that you don't have to remove most shoes - which you can get around by enrolling in TSA Precheck, in which case you also don't have to remove belts, jewelry, or coats (the same as CATSA's NEXUS program). If you fail a scanner check in the US, chances are you will fail one in Canada as well, in which case you will be "fondled". I fail them all the time (no idea why - I just leave my belt on now since there's no point in taking it off) and all they do is do a very, very quick pat down your back and check your beltline in the back. No fondling involved - only way that would happen is if you're using a chastity device or a buttplug (you're always so uptight that, to be honest, that's not outside the realm of possibility in my mind). It takes maybe 2 seconds. TSA and CATSA treated me the same way in this regard. If you don't want TSA fondling you, why do you not care if CATSA fondles you? The rule of "no liquids past this line" is there for a reason. Yes, it's a stupid reason, but being lax on this rule also subjects us to the discretion of TSA agents. At what point can you bring things you bought from a vending machine before the security checkpoint does it become prohibited? TSA agents are notoriously stupid. The guideline is there because, frankly, they are stupid. It is a simple rule for simple people. If this is seriously such a big fucking problem for you, here's an idea - maybe go through security before spending $3 on a can of Dr. Pepper. Airport terminals are not barren wastelands without food or drink. Your anecdote about your toy tank is also completely irrelevant. What about someone with an antique firearm? Yeah, let's take that carryon, because they are too scared to check it and they didn't have the foresight to ship it beforehand. What kind of situation would necessitate you having a toy tank immediately after you disembark the plane? On top of that, how often do you actually need to bring it with you when you travel? Get real. You mention using cops - in other countries, this is what they often actually do, yes. However, who's to say Johnny Law from the local sheriff's office is going to have the appropriate training? Are you seriously suggesting that the common cop would do any better than a TSA knobhead? TSA folks can hardly find their own dicks, sure, but they at least understand what they're supposed to do when someone leaves a water bottle in their bag. They're standardized and consistent in what they do. Maybe I am spoiled by going through huge airports (DEN, ATL, etc.) but for the hundreds of flights I've taken, I have never once seen anyone actually "felt up" in any sense of the word by TSA. Every pat-down I've seen has been quick and fruitless because TSA agents also realize that there's no point to this. Nobody is hiding a bomb in the wire of their bra. They want to get everyone through as quickly as possible without complaints, because they are infinitely more likely to get shitcanned for grabbing some dude's junk than they are for accidentally letting someone through with a gun. Disclaimer: I am neither for nor against the TSA as an entity itself. I'm only making a point in that you wasting your time in this fruitless crusade against TSA by driving to Canada (which you've likely never done anyway) is something to be left to YouTube comments. Fun fact: TSA used backscatter x-ray and millimeter-wave scanners from 2007 to 2012, at which time the backscatter machines (the ones that actually give a picture instead of a computer-generated "threat map") were removed nationwide.[/QUOTE] Thank you for having the patience to type all this out. A lot of his opinions are based on things he's managed to generate in his head, with little to no fact or personal experience. TSA is a necessary evil; one that could be improved, but likely won't, and if we're to improve government services, there's a ton more I would pick first.
The TSA is an unnecessary waste of taxpayer money that is also (clearly) not even good at accomplishing their job. Let the state, city, or better yet the airports deal with security; then some efficiency might be injected into the system being that companies like money, and they would probably have a hard time doing worse than the TSA at this point. [quote]OP's article is an example of TSA being inept and incapable of preventing actual terror threats, which is true and embarrassing, but not an indication of the TSA being unbearable to deal with. If anything it would be an argument for increased security and increased hassle, I get seriously mixed messages from some people on this subject. The TSA is too much security, get rid of it! The TSA isn't enough security, get rid of it![/quote] No, it's rather clear, the TSA's "security measures" are a complete fucking waste of time, and yet somehow planes aren't crashing out of the sky left and right due to terrorists. Perhaps there isn't this massive threat. Perhaps we should stop living in fear of the next terrorist attack and get on with our lives. [quote]but they at least understand what they're supposed to do when someone leaves a water bottle in their bag.[/quote] Anyone should know what to do when they find a water bottle, absolutely nothing. Just like all of the wasted resources calling in a bomb squad whenever someone forgets a package someplace. Sure, on the one hand, "better safe than sorry" or what not, on the other hand, this constant state of fear is not a good state of existence.
Airport security once took away all the chocolate bars from my backpack, good thing I had some stuffed in the sidepockets of the jacket aswell.
[QUOTE=Blue Meanie;47859121]My cousin once brought a lighter on a plane in her purse, she could have made a mini alcohol bottle molotov![/QUOTE] you can buy rc helis in the post security shops. Most even connect to phones nowadays. So think of all the damage you could wreck in a plane with bombs and the like that we're all already afraid of, except they can be remotely triggered from your phone using only parts you bought [b]post security[/b]
And they release the test numbers? I really hope they optimize the security control points to deal with these dangers. [quote]In one test an undercover agent was stopped after setting off an alarm at a magnetometer, but TSA screeners failed to detect a fake explosive device that was taped to his back during a follow-on pat down.[/quote] This is retarded. No wonder why people tell us that our security checks here in Norway is more strict than in the US. If they don't aim to find out what the magnetometer kicked out on, there's no use in having a magnetometer at all.
I dunno, going through international airport security in the US is like a lottery. You'll never know when you'll be given the most intimate pat-down you've ever experienced, have your bags swabbed for chemicals and explosives, have 'SSSS' on your boarding pass or get [I]additional[/I] customs bag screening. Whenever I do go through smoothly it feels unusual.
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;47854018]orders of magnitude more likely to die in a car crash, and it'd be more painful too[/QUOTE] I don't think he's worried about dying, I just don't think he likes to be molested by a fat highschool dropout
maybe they put this out so terrorists would think they could get away with anything thereby causing them to try various things and get arrested genius
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.