Slashdot Mirror
TSA Has Record-Breaking Haul In 2014: Guns, Cannons, and Swords
An anonymous reader writes The TSA has gathered an impressive pile of confiscated weapons this year. In early November the agency had already discovered 1,855 firearms at checkpoints. In addition to guns, they've also collected machetes, hatchets, swords, giant scissors, brass knuckles, cannonballs, bear repellent and, this past October, an unloaded cannon. "Maybe someone has a lucky inert grenade they brought back from some war, or a nice cane was given to them and they forgot that the thing is actually a sword," said Jeff Price, author of Practical Aviation Security, "It's the people that are carrying stuff like chainsaws that make me wonder."
You mean people who work for tree removal services? That makes you wonder?
We had a bad ice storm here last year, I personally know about a dozen people who flew in with their chainsaws to help with cleanup, and pocket sacks of cash since just about every tree in town was damaged.
These were items confiscated, i.e. stolen from citizens. Heaven forbid that American citizens think they have a right to keep and bear arms. Bearing arms is the mark of a terrorist. Not the kind of terrorist who actually blows up buildings or shoots people, mind you, rather just one who plays the part of "Terrorist" in the Security Theater.
Sooooo all things a metal detector and airline security would have found? Excellent, well spent money.
If anyone manages to hijack an airplane with an old historical cannon, kudos to them.
This sort of confiscation is ridiculous and unnecessary. What a waste of money. Think of all the improvements we could have made to the USA instead of throwing it into "security."
FTFA: "but there are also those who may be affiliated with terrorist groups that decide to test the system to see what they can get through"
Yeah, because that happens. They need to stop fooling themselves and abandon this modern age "witch hunt" for "terrorists".
I turned down an offer as a(n) __________ b/c they had an opening at tsa...
Confiscating a canon as a weapon is pants-on-head retarded. Is it filled with powder? Then it's harmless. It's too heavy to even use a club.
Someone tried to bring an actual cannon on a plane? Not a miniature or toy but a real cannon? I find that hard to believe...
Can the TSA explain me, how the f**k would one load and shoot a cannon inside an airplane?? To what purpose?
Wow. I mean, I travel a ton and get annoyed by the TSA as much as the next guy, but you really think it's OK to take a gun onto an airplane? Agree to disagree. People who need to transport their legally owned firearms can do so through the simple act of checking them. There isn't an airline or country the world over that would allow firearms, not to mention loaded _with rounds chambered_ (FTFA) onto a plane.
We can argue all we want to about the cannon (I'm with the anon who thinks if you manage to hijack a plane with it... congrats!), but guns, grenades, large knives... just check it! This isn't a terrorism thing. It's basic safety 101, especially in an already stressful, crowded environment.
--------------------- -me, Crusher of those who are Foolish (don't be foolish)
OK. I can see cannon or swords as weapons. That's the point of them. But why is bear repellent a weapon? Are bears secretly part of the anti-terrorist program?
Cue people who have nothing to add to the conversation but snide remarks that really do nothing for anyone.
And how many planes were hijacked?
None-- the deterrent worked.
How many self-important jerks were discouraged from flying?
More than last year.
You really think that joker 'forgot' there was a sword in their cane or umbrella?
You really think that canon would fit under the seat or was correctly sized for overhead luggage?
The citizens knew the rules before they attempted to board the planes; I'm glad to see the screws coming down these people. Because all of them are just bullies and trying to weasel their way out of things.
Self defense my ass.
zero.
you really think it's OK to take a gun onto an airplane
Not much worse than taking a gun to a shopping mall or movie theater, actually.
... it's a wonder we didn't have aircraft falling out of the sky left and right before the TSA was around.
Or, were people not bringing this stuff on places before 9/11, and we got the TSA in place just in the nick of time?
I know what you mean. Just why the hell can't we bring chainsaws onto the 747!? Have they gone mental? When is the last time that a terrorist with a chainsaw took over an aircraft? Please! Anyone with half a brain knows there is no way you could really run with it either, the isles are too narrow. Besides, who would notice it in operation over the crying babies? What on earth happened to our freedom!?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
We can argue all we want to about the cannon (I'm with the anon who thinks if you manage to hijack a plane with it... congrats!)
You know nothing. You put the cannons at the windows, and shoot at the wings of the other planes. Once they are hit, you throw hooks to hijack and loot! That's how to pirate an airship.
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
You're welcome to your opinion that the 2nd Amendment was a mistake.
if passengers are allowed to bring their own bear repellent there's no need for a "professional" bear patrol... (i.e. job security)
Shopping malls don't tend to depressurize when punctured.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Great! You've got that one covered!
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
The movie depressurizing is not real.
fear: Americans were once again this year permitted to take their uncodifiable fear of terrorism along each and every flight.
compliance:unquestioned, lock step obedience to a national travel policy thats done nothing to reduce or eliminate terrorism, as domestic events like the Aurora and giffords shooting have simply been redefined as tragedies. Anders Brevik's christian crusade of bloodshed was not stopped by the inability to bring nail clippers onto a plane.
poverty: americans got to take their looming debt, foreclosures, and reposessions along for the ride while dutifully shuffling sixty billion dollars to the department of homeland security, an agency that failed to stop terrorism like the benghazi bombing, or the boston marathon bombing, at all.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Save America from the Police State, shutter TSA and the Dept of Homeland Security.
what if i see a bird outside the window and want to shoot it?
From the paternalist, condescending article: Beyond firearms, of course, TSA officers encounter an extremely wide variety of other prohibited items at airport checkpoints, including ... an unloaded cannon.
Because archeologist or collectors should absolutely check in priceless historical artifacts! It's not like baggage handler would steal anything, or the airlines would lose luggage, ho ho, how silly.
Hey, this thing was a firearm once, right? So it's totally justified, innit? Even though the picture even shows that the thing is rusty, unable to fire, and very old.
Do you know how funny it is in Dilbert cartoon when the PHB adopts a tone of condescending smugness to assert misinformed, ill-reasoned opinions? Well, somehow, these bureaucrats don't manage to make it funny.
--
Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/
If someone had a gun on September 11, 2001 perhaps the history would be different. In Soviet Russia all pilots were armed, and rightly so.
I travel and every day I see pocket knifes, souvenir knifes being stolen at the checkpoints. The other day my credit card size stainless steel multi-tool (ruler, screwdriver, wrench and a 2 centimeter cutting edge) has been confiscated because it had a less than one inch "blade". Yikes.
Every single day passengers bring bottles of whiskey and other alcohol in the glass bottles, which is essentially a ceramic blade/knife, if the bottle is broken. Heck, you can buy alcohol in the airplane.
I have interviewed several airport security directors and directors supplying security solutions. All of them, in private, agreed that this is a security theater.
Freaking terrorists with Freaking Chainsaws attached to their heads
I agree that most of what the TSA does is BS. That being said, it's perfectly reasonable to restrict weapons onboard flights. It's also not up to the TSA as to whether the weapons are confiscated. That is up to local laws and law enforcement.
Shopping malls don't tend to depressurize when punctured.
Neither do aircraft.
The pressurisation pumps are more than capable of keeping up with the amount of air leaking through a thumb-sized hole.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
Could we forego the TSA click-bait hate-mongering till after the holidays or something?
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Most airports let you mail the items back home now. It's only confiscated if it's not worth the cost to mail it back.
The stuff on their prohibited list is pretty silly though. They wouldn't let me bring a piano tuning wrench in my carry on. It's basically a fixed socket wrench about 12 inches long, no sharp edges or points so can't be used for jabbing/prying like a screwdriver, and designed to be lightweight so you couldn't use it like a hammer. But there's some rule prohibiting tools over 8 inches, so they refused to let me bring it aboard. Unfortunately you can't just pick one up at the local hardware store, so I had to pay 25% of what a new one cost to check in my carry-on bag.
Neither do airplanes.
People who need to transport their legally owned firearms can do so through the simple act of checking them.
There is about the same chance of a gun getting discovered by the TSA at checkpoint as there is of getting your gun discovered in luggage. However, the chances of them confiscating it if discovered at the checkpoint is 100%, while the chance of TSA stealing it out of your luggage is probably only about 1/4 or an 1/8th of that. Statistics say that you should check your gun, because 80% or so of the time, it will not get stolen.
Unfortunately, in this day and age, you really should carry on anything worth more to you than a pair of jeans. Since you can no longer lock your luggage, and the TSA agents have stolen billions of dollars of items out of luggage, you are a fool to check anything valuable.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Simple, I am guessing it was to heavy for a checked-in and would be suspicious when too heavy. So someone decided to take it as carry on which is rarely weighted.
These people are generally not bringing their gun on an airplane because they want to shoot someone (I can't vouch for everyone's intent). These are people that probably have a valid conceal carry permit, don't normally fly, and just worked out of habit only to have their stuff confiscated. Meaning, that while it was an error they can't get their stuff back.
Do I find an inert hand grenade paperweight to be a terribly frightening weapon? Nope, but the TSA does and confiscates those too. Gag items like giant scissors are not a threat either, well maybe if they were sharpened in in the hands of Chuck Norris (who would be a threat without the giant scissors). A "cannon ball" is not a threat without, well.. a cannon and a good amount of black powder.
Maybe the term "mens rea" is lost on you, but it has been a critical part of western legal systems for centuries. At least until recently anyway. IMHO this is just the TSA trying to A) Justify their job. and B) Attempt to humor us in that attempt.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Wow. I mean, I travel a ton and get annoyed by the TSA as much as the next guy, but you really think it's OK to take a gun onto an airplane? Agree to disagree.
It is by strict interpretation of the US Constitution a guaranteed right, that neither federal nor state governments are granted the authority to infringe upon.
Whether it makes sense for citizens to have that right is a more difficult question and solid arguments can be made for or against. The most salient ones are of coarse that an armed populous on average makes everyone less safe, but on the other hand making weapons illegal does not actually ensure their complete absence and an unarmed population makes easy targets for an armed criminal force.
Where it get's murky is that technically the planes and airports are private property owned by private companies. the Airlines are saying that a condition for entering their private property is voluntary disarmament, and they use their right to exclude anyone form their private property (no cause required) to enforce it. The TSA is then acting similarly to a bouncer at a night club (enforcing the owner's arbitrary rules about who is allowed in). A hypothetical private airport could choose to have no security, but in practice that's not likely as that is a huge liability risk that no organization large enough to afford passenger liners is going to be willing to take.
Agreed with your post.
The first line of defense is Intelligence. They are doing a pretty good job despite all the concerns raised by people like Snowden.
TSA is the last line of defense. The entire system makes traveling safe. Aside from asking "how many of those were terrorists?" let's also consider that there have been no successful terrorist activity on US airlines since all these measures were put in place.
Btw, security checkpoints are rarely a huge chokepoint. It is always U.S. customs when coming in to the US or otherwise it's a toss between baggage check-in (the airlines have also done a good job optimizing) and baggages reception.
But, I wouldn't mind if there were especially designed planes with no security for the whiners. So long as there is a self-destroy mechanism in case of highjacking...
Could it have been "Blogger Bob" of the TSA that sent in this blog post about a TSA fluff blog post?
No. It is not. Not their property. They have no authority to even exist. No more than deciding what I can carry on my person, in my car, to the mall, into a skyscraper, into a casino, on a bus.
Why is it so difficult to understand, unless I aggress against some person, or some person's property, I am to be left to pursue my own happiness, and enjoy my liberties.
IMO all adults (with exemptions for handicapped and/or mentally disabled) should be *required* to carry a handgun on an airplane. If everyone is armed, the terrorists have no standing at all.
Rentals should be made available at the terminal, for people who don't own guns or forgot to bring theirs.
I'd just be concerned with the amount of air trying to escape through a small opening and demanding an increase in throughput by pressure at a weakened structure, potentially leading to getting its way and creating an opening large enough to let objects larger than bullets pass.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
There are valid circumstances to fire a gun there. AFAIK there are no valid circumstances for firing a normal pistol in an airborne airplane.
>so I had to pay 25% of what a new one cost to check in my carry-on bag.
Bingo! That's why people carry stuff on that they would otherwise check. Airlines started charging for checked bags.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
The pressurisation pumps are more than capable of keeping up with the amount of air leaking through a thumb-sized hole.
"A thumb-sized hole?" And if there are 10-20 of them, with some being shot out windows? (With maybe some equipment damage?)
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
The danger is not depressurisation, the danger is damage to the flight control systems, damage to the electrical systems, punching holes in fuel tanks (and probably making a bit of sparking and friction heat while at it), puncturing a landing wheel and the like. There are many, many ways a small hole in a vital part can endanger or even disable a modern airliner. Add to that the danger of a sleep deprived, stressed out person on a red-eye shooting an innocent he believed to be a terrorist, or just that f-ing annoying kid who keeps crying and kicking his seat... Also; seeing as there is no such things as a clear shoot inside the anxiety tube that is an airplane, you are going to hit something (or someone) that would be better off with no holes in it - even if you're firing at a legitimate target.
I much prefer if those who can legally carry check their guns on boarding - over here in Europe at least there used to be (might still be) a strong box up front where you could store such things as guns.
And honestly; if you're so attached to your weapon that you can't be separated from it while flying, perhaps driving might be a better solution for everyone involved?
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
An airliner isn't going to depressurize from something like a bullet hole either. Now if a large bomb blows a 3 meter hole in the fuselage, that'll depressurize and people's ears will pop painfully. The pressurization air is the same compressed air that provides 85% of the forward thrust of provided by it's two 54,000 lb thrust engines.
Here's how much air is available:
http://code7700.com/videos/top...
If the airliner is at maximum altitude when the large chunk of fuselage is removed and the cabin loses pressure, the pilot should descend to 8,000 feet or below because the passengers will get dizzy after a few minutes and may pass out.
> Wow. I mean, I travel a ton and get annoyed by the TSA as much as the next guy, but you really think it's OK to take a gun onto an airplane?
What matters here is the context - the TSA needs to justify its 7+ billion dollar budget. Add to that the net drain on national economic productivity of all the time wasted by every single passenger who is slowed down by the excessive process, plus the cost of all that personal stuff they make people dump in those collection barrels. All that money, and all they are catching are a bunch of idiots who forgot that they were carrying.
When you consider that the TSA has a detection failure rate of 70% that means for every gun they do confiscate, 2 more get through. And yet we have had zero gun related problems on aircraft for the entire lifetime of the TSA. So, that says to me that while letting people carry guns on planes isn't the wisest idea, it isn't all that much of a problem. Certainly not a 7 billion dollar problem.
with some being shot out windows?
The multi-layered laminated windows on aircraft don't "shoot out".
[People have shot up planes before, you know. Both in actual acts of terrorism and in testing.]
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
Disappointed my slingshot did not make the list this year. Piss.
Fuck the TSA and FUCK the government
In Soviet Russia all pilots were armed, and rightly so.
Citation needed.
Until there are 4 or 5 thumb sized holes, or a hole the size of a window
Plus no one has ever piloted a shopping mall into a building
I get what you mean, but an airflow of 10-12psi through metal holes generally doesn't "erode" like that. The metal would have to be extremely weak and brittle already, say pre-fatigued to the verge of failure, in which case the aircraft was already a death-trap.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
Cockpit, maybe. But all the windows being bullet proof on a large aircraft? I doubt it.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Still, it's not catastrophic. All that will happen is the masks dropping, the pilots having to don theirs quickly, lowering the altitude, and that's about it. Nobody should die if you merely shoot out through the fuselage.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
Then it's settled. Guns on planes are a good idea. Maybe they could be handed out instead of peanuts?
Well if there are more than 6 holes, we know the plane didn't originate in NY, and if more than 10, the plane didn't originate in California...
Err, you know you are not only allowed to lock luggage containing a gun, but you are required to do so? It's spelled out explicitly in the rules.*
While it was a few years ago and the laws may have changed, I read somewhere that you should travel with a starter pistol. The TSA considers them guns, which means you are allowed (required) to securely lock your checked baggage, but (most) states don't consider them weapons, so you can travel with them to different states without multiple concealed carry permits.
* this is with a real lock, not a TSA lock
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
You put the cannons at the windows, and shoot at the wings of the other planes. Once they are hit, you throw hooks to hijack and loot!
Similar to how Peter used cannons to loot this poor mans sugar cane, tobacco and spices.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
that motherfukers confiscated my pliers (2 times)
People took guns on planes for DECADES without incident. It wasnt until some jackasses with box cutters that guns were banned.
Good-bye
How about a report detailing exactly how many legitimate "terror plots" have been foiled by these vaunted security measures?
I travel and every day I see pocket knifes, souvenir knifes being stolen at the checkpoints. The other day my credit card size stainless steel multi-tool (ruler, screwdriver, wrench and a 2 centimeter cutting edge) has been confiscated because it had a less than one inch "blade". Yikes.
To be fair, John Pistole (the TSA head) tried to drop this restriction and permit knifes with blades <= 2.36 inches, but transportation workers, victims groups, and various congressmen thru a hissy-fit, so he was forced to drop it.
2.36 inches!! Land of the brave, my arse.
-1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
People who need to transport their legally owned firearms can do so through the simple act of checking them.
WHOOOOOSH!!!
That was GP's whole point: anybody stupid enough (or forgetful enough) to try to carry something like this onto a plane just isn't much of a threat.
Who says they're going to fire the gun ? Most gun carrying folks in the US rarely fire it in public.
Every window on a large passenger aircraft are multi-layered laminated glass and plastic, not just the cockpit windows. They don't explode out when punctured.
As I said, people have shot up planes before. This is not a new thing.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
Wow. I mean, I travel a ton and get annoyed by the TSA as much as the next guy, but you really think it's OK to take a gun onto an airplane?
Irrelevant. Every single one of those items would have been discovered at the check points that existed prior to the 2001 attacks (though I have to admit that highly dangerous items like knitting needles and shampoo would have been allowed through). All without arrogant, highly overpaid and under-qualified federal employees tooting their own horn about how important they think they are. All TSA brings to the table are unsafe x-ray machines, nudie scanners, and "enhanced patdowns" based on female breast size.
Err, you know you are not only allowed to lock luggage containing a gun, but you are required to do so? It's spelled out explicitly in the rules.*
While it was a few years ago and the laws may have changed, I read somewhere that you should travel with a starter pistol. The TSA considers them guns, which means you are allowed (required) to securely lock your checked baggage, but (most) states don't consider them weapons, so you can travel with them to different states without multiple concealed carry permits.
* this is with a real lock, not a TSA lock
I've heard the same suggestion in reference to a flare gun. In both cases, don't bother buying flares or starter caps; all you need is the appropriate suitcase, gun case, and lock.
Note that TSA will search your bag that contains a declared firearm. Unlike all the other bags they open in the luggage caverns, they will search yours right in front of you, before you lock it. Implied is that they will not be able to take anything out of the luggage, while you are watching them.
Did anyone take a close look at the Cannon? A cast bronze muzzle loading BARREL of a cannon, that could not be made to fire in it's current form! Most likely an either a valuable antique or a decorator piece of little value but in any case not a dangerous "weapon". The knives, guns, swords I can understand, but to use THAT to show what a good job they are doing? The thing should have been recognized for what it is, or rather what it is NOT and not been confiscated.
Myth busters did that years ago. They pressurized a plane and shot a bullet through a window. It wasn't that bad.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
US Marshalls carry on planes, some airlines have firearms in the cockpit.
http://www.tsa.gov/about-tsa/law-enforcement-officers-flying-armed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Air_Marshal_Service
So it would seem for someone that travels a ton you are blissfully unaware that there is a high probability that flights you are on have a firearm inside the cabin with you.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
If you don't like it, buy your own plane. After all, they are private property owned by someone else when you fly commercial.
All TSA brings to the table are unsafe x-ray machines, nudie scanners, and "enhanced patdowns" based on female breast size.
Oh, I forgot to mention that the nudie machines have been proven multiple times not to work.
Please. I'd just download one.
When someone says, "Any fool can see
If someone had a gun on September 11, 2001 perhaps the history would be different. In Soviet Russia all pilots were armed, and rightly so.
I travel and every day I see pocket knifes, souvenir knifes being stolen at the checkpoints. The other day my credit card size stainless steel multi-tool (ruler, screwdriver, wrench and a 2 centimeter cutting edge) has been confiscated because it had a less than one inch "blade". Yikes.
Every single day passengers bring bottles of whiskey and other alcohol in the glass bottles, which is essentially a ceramic blade/knife, if the bottle is broken. Heck, you can buy alcohol in the airplane.
I have interviewed several airport security directors and directors supplying security solutions. All of them, in private, agreed that this is a security theater.
No it wouldn't. It wasn't a problem to fight against the hobby knives unarmed either, no one expected the hijackers to be suicide terrorist, and the only thing that would make a difference is hind-sight.
Will the owner of that private property try you in a private courtroom and sentence you to a privately owned prison for attempting to bring a gun onto the plane?
let's also consider that there have been no successful terrorist activity on US airlines since all these measures were put in place.
However, all non-successful attempts were stopped by passengers on the aircraft, not TSA.
TSA cannot point to a single example of a terrorist being stopped by them. Not one.
(And you know they would be shouting it from the rooftops, given that they brag about stealing items from non-terrorists as if their agents had done something good.)
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
In Soviet Russia all pilots were armed, and rightly so.
Citation needed.
Well, they were often loaded. Not sure about the armed part.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
After 9/11, people aren't going to let anybody take over a plane, even if they're carrying a gun.
Leaking gas for one thing. Same reason you shouldn't carry propane stoves, gas fueled lanterns or any number of potentially hazardous devices.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
IMO all adults [...] should be *required* to carry a handgun on an airplane.
Agreed.
Also the airplanes must be required to set up duelling ranges for passenger disputes (this may be a dual-purposed (heh) aisle, to make it easier on the airlines.)
Well, it's obvious what part of "keep and bear arms" you missed the point of. Words have meanings. If you want the wording of that piece of law changed, then go through the process. If enough people agree with you, you'll get your wish. Until then, sit down, shut up, and keep your terror to yourself.
Guns would certainly be more healthy than airline peanuts.
You owe me a new keyboard.
Anyone who tries to take a gun or chainsaw on a plane is a moron, but making people leave their nail clippers etc is bullshit.
What about martial artists who's hands alone are far more lethal than some stupid pointy keyring? How come they dont stop them from flying? I'm surprised that the TSA hasn't already tried to make everyone fly in handcuffs.
Archie Bunker said it best. 'When you get on the plane, the stewardess should hand out pistols. When you land she should collect them.'
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
If someone had a gun on September 11, 2001 perhaps the history would be different.
Unlikely. Back then, people were told to play it safe, comply with demands, remain quiet, and wait for the situation to defuse naturally or be handled by law enforcement.
Pre-9/11, a serious hijacking meant you got to see some obscure part of the globe that doesn't get many visitors. Maybe the doctors would give you some shots or take some blood samples for testing depending on where you ended up. The airline or the government would take care of shipping you back to the States. Most bystander deaths were due to wannabe heroes.
The suicide attacks were a new thing, which was part of why it was so shocking.
Pre-911 being hijacked meant "If you sit down and be quiet, we fly this plane to Cuba, protest for a bit and then everyone goes free. An inconvenience, but nobody gets hurt. If you try to fight back, you'll be killed." So even if someone had a gun in the first two planes, they would have likely kept quiet until it was too late.
The passengers in the third plane did try to shoot back when they found out what happened to the first two planes, but a passenger with a gun might not have made much of a difference. At that point, the terrorists had control of the airplane and even a gun wouldn't have given the passengers the upper hand quick enough to keep the terrorists from crashing the plane.
Nowadays, if someone tries to hijack a plane - even if they intend the "flight to Cuba" kind of hijacking - the passengers are going to rise up, guns or no guns.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Your anti-gun rhetoric is showing.
Add to that the danger of a sleep deprived, stressed out person on a red-eye shooting an innocent he believed to be a terrorist
Yeah, because the guy standing up with a knife shouting out isn't a terrorist.
or just that f-ing annoying kid who keeps crying and kicking his seat
Because this happens all the time. Oh wait, nope, it doesn't.
You jumped the shark quite a lot there kiddo.
Why do you keep repeating facts? You're interfering with story-time.
You just gave some RIAA lawyer a brain aneurysm.
I'm sure the Supreme Court will be most impressed by your reasoning and address any shortcomings as soon as possible.
Until then, Congress has the power to spend money for both common defense and general welfare. If you don't like how they're doing it, talk to your elected officials.
i'd be more concerned with turbulence. you're going to stow that chunk of solid metal in the overhead? that thing ever pops out of that bin, and it will kill someone, no might or maybes about it. also, what kind of lunatic would think that that would pass muster?
TSA trying oh so very hard to appear effective.
:) that's right, bringing is a gun into an airplane is no more dangerous than bringing a gun into a school.
As we all know, there have never been any school shootings. ergo, guns on planes are perfectly safe.
Don't forget the bicycle tools they stole.
In response we must keep and arm bears.
You've never built an earthen dam and then cut a small channel (smaller even than thumb size) in the top of it, have you? Try it. See what happens. While I don't know and don't want to find out, I'd be willing to bet that an analogous event would ultimately bring down that plane. Maybe in control. Maybe not.
Depending on the relative pressures, of course.
Why do you think it's okay to confiscate people's property?
Even if a particular item isn't allowed on carry-on, why is it just assumed to be acceptable to permanently steal it from the passengers unless their was a suspicious of malice and it was evidence in the criminal case against them?
This is particularly true of the cannon and chainsaw. Unless the cannon had gunpowder and the chainsaw fuel, both are useless as weapons. (At best really clumsy bludgeons.) Even if you decide to not allow them in carry-on, because... {handwave} reasons... why is it necessary to permanently steal it from the passenger to use as a trophy, rather than put it in the baggage hold or allow the owners to make arrangements to reclaim their property later? (Hell, it's an airport, there's going to be a freight company like FedEx nearby. Given the number of items being taken from passengers, returning them seems a pretty simple thing to standardise.)
But look it another way, this is the cream of the crop, gathered from nationwide, the trophies the TSA puts on show to justify their existence and try to deflect criticism. And yet most of the items seem to many of us to be hysterical overreactions, that few of the items should have actually been confiscated from the passengers, and even fewer permanently.
So if that's the best of the best, how bad is the rest of the haul?
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
The windows don't shoot out, they get thumb sized holes.
If you put enough holes in the plane, then the pilot will have to descend until the cabin pressure stabilizes. Of course since there is an in-flight emergency, hel'' be descending for a landing at the nearest airport anyway. Once on the ground, the coroner will pick up the broken and desecrated corpse of the shooter, police will interview the passengers, and they can be on their way.
Now build the same dam out of aluminum and repeat the experiment.
He didn't claim they are bullet proof, he claimed that they don't blow out.
Because planes are made out of dirt?
You fucking idiot.
Because his facts are evolving.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
... the only thing you listed where you are not actually trespassing is your car. everything else is subject to the good will the proprietors.
And if the plane crashes, your laptop could take someone's head off but it's just fine even though it might "vent with flame".
No, I don't agree to disagree. They PAY people to take guns on board airplanes, and not in checked bagage either!
And the last time someone caught one'a dem terrists on board a plane... it was a paying passenger, not one of the blessed with a gun.
I agree. The folks in the exit row should get machine guns, and business class gets grenade launchers.
We can hand out switchblades to the toddlers.
Right to carry arms is in the constitution. Right to bear arms on a plane is not. Actually I don't think right to be on a plane was mentioned either.
Private property which means that the owners can restrict it all they want. The limitations in the bill of rights applies to the government.
All Soviet manned spacecraft had firearms on board, and there are always at least two firearms on board the ISS in the Russian section. It used to be a special-made shotgun, but now I think they've switched to Makarov pistols.
Those weapons were only fired in anger once... to fight off a bear (on the ground after landing, not in space...).
so they tied last year's record at zero terrorists caught, and you are pissed at this expensive, invasive, delay-causing theater, so am I, so what ? The frequent-travelers who have to put up with this crap are such a small part of the electorate that we simply don't matter. The vast majority see this as valuable insurance against people they have been told to fear.
Nullius in verba
If they were terrorists, the TSA probably should have done something like stopped them from getting on the airplane and calling law enforcement. It's somewhat ridiculous to think that there are potential terrorists getting on planes and all we're doing about them is throwing their bombs in the trash before the board.
"You wouldn't download a cannon..."
Wow. I mean, I travel a ton and get annoyed by the TSA as much as the next guy, but you really think it's OK to take a gun onto an airplane? Agree to disagree. People who need to transport their legally owned firearms can do so through the simple act of checking them.
And if someone accidentally forgets to check in their weapons then they can be politely reminded that they need to do so and have their bags sent to check-in instead of having their property confiscated.
Amen...
There have been various such events over the past 12 years, most not reported by the media which has a message to sell.
One such event was on Southwest Airlines in 2006, a passenger started acting crazy and stood up and started yelling in a foreign language and scared the crap out of everyone.
Turns out he was just off his meds and off his rocker, but he was tackled by the passengers and arrested when the plane landed. They actually broke two rows of seats knocking him down, must have been 15 people on him.
Never saw anything on the news about it, but a friend of mine is a flight attendant at Southwest and the event is well known inside the company.
Such things just don't get reported because it doesn't match the message being sold.
Security Theater indeed...
---------------
So yes, a gun won't help you, you can't really hijack a plane anymore, the terrorists would be outnumbered and they can't shoot everyone.
In Soviet Russia all pilots were armed, and rightly so.
So are about 12,000 US commercial airline pilots.
Federal Flight Deck Officer program.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
Government steals stuff, news at 11.
well are the overheads designed with those kinds of loads in mind? i said turbulence not a crash. laptop won't take someone's head off... might crush someone's throat, cause a serious concussion if it was moving really really fast. flesh and bone are pretty resilient. also might help if it were aluminum...
13 lbs of laptop falling 2-3 feet won't be pleasant if it lands on your head, but i don't think it'll kill you too easily unless you're unlucky. 50-60 lbs of metal falling 2-3 feet is pretty lethal anywhere near the head.
The cannon was checked baggage, confirmed as unloaded, and in a lockable container .
On the other hand it didn't get confiscated, they gave the owner the option to ship separately as freight.
I'm not sure how passenger baggage as opposed to freight baggage changes the threat profile.
If you put enough holes in the plane, then the pilot will have to descend until the cabin pressure stabilizes.
No, he'll have to descend until it reaches a partial pressure of oxygen that will not kill anyone. You can have a "stabilized" cabin pressure of "very low" at 35,000 feet, but once the short-term oxy generators run out people will be passing out and some may die.
And if the holes are in the pilot and co-pilot, and they're behind a locked door, you'll eventually descend until ground level.
Of course since there is an in-flight emergency, hel'' be descending for a landing at the nearest airport anyway.
Really? The aircraft is still flying, the cabin pressure has "stabilized", and there may be casualties, so he'll choose to land at the 5000 foot asphalt strip that's 2 miles away instead of going 30 or even 300 miles to a larger airport with on-site emergency facilities? "Closest" is not always "right" just because there is an emergency.
In both cases, don't bother buying flares or starter caps; all you need is the appropriate suitcase, gun case, and lock.
All you need is ammunition. Buy a cheap box of 22 or shotgun shells.
Implied is that they will not be able to take anything out of the luggage, while you are watching them.
I don't know why you think that is implied. I think you infer it incorrectly.
That was GP's whole point: anybody stupid enough (or forgetful enough) to try to carry something like this onto a plane just isn't much of a threat.
What is the point of this argument? Are you saying that it's ok to allow people to carry guns onto a plane because those who forget to check their weapons aren't much of a threat? Are you saying that TSA agents who paw through your carry-on should be making judgement calls to differentiate between those who were just too stupid or forgetful to check a gun and those who are saying they forgot to check it when caught? I don't know why it matters if some people could be forgetful or stupid in this matter. What difference should it make in the process?
And if someone accidentally forgets to check in their weapons then they can be politely reminded that they need to do so and have their bags sent to check-in instead of having their property confiscated.
You want a TSA officer in the security checkpoint line having enough discretion to try to differentiate between someone who actually forgot he had a weapon and someone who is trying to sneak one past because he wants to use it on board? How many attempts should someone get to sneak a gun through the line so he can finally succeed when it isn't detected? If all that happens when he's caught is the gun is politely handed back to him and he's told to go to check it, what stops him from trying again, and again?
You are clearly doing your best to mis-interpret literally everything I typed. Helpful tips:
Trimming one's fingernails does not generally mean with a lawn mower nor does it involve amputation above the elbow. Filling the car with gas doesn't mean farting nor does it involve fuel in the passenger compartment. By 'gas', the writer probably does NOT mean sulfur hexaflouride.
I would suggest that a cannon should go under the seat.
You are clearly doing your best to mis-interpret literally everything I typed. Helpful tips:
Here's my helpful tip to you: write accurate statements and don't try to pretend there are multiple meanings for the phrase "cabin pressure stabilizes" or "closest airport". And then when you get caught in multiple mistakes in one posting, don't try killing the messenger, use it as a reminder to preview what you write before you submit.
They're almost handing out guns on the plane...like the air marshal who got suspended for leaving his weapon in the lavatory.
You can't possibly know whether someone abandoned his attempted terrorism because his weapon was confiscated.
He isn't going to tell anybody "Hey, I actually planned to hijack the plane with this!"
Uh. No. at 35+ thousand feet that hole would get much bigger fairly quickly. (Granted, not as quickly as the movies make it out to be). And the packs on your average commercial airliner will most certainly NOT be able to maintain pressurization if someone starts shooting holes in the damn plane.
Source: Am airline pilot.
You guys are just plain nuts. Here's how it it meant to work. Excuse sir/madam you are not allowed to carry that item onto the aircraft, allow me to check it in for you. Either arrest them for an illegal item or if it is not illegal check it in for them. Why the bloody hell do you just allow them to steal your legal stuff, the items that you are not allowed to carry on should just be checked in. The crap cowardly people are willing to put up with is just amazing.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Comment removed based on user account deletion
there were on the order of 800,000,000 people who flew last year
True, a lot of em are freq flyers
But still, there is a big difference between 1,855 and 800,000,000
(at least in my book)
engineers: correct to a decimal place
physicists: correct to an order of magnitude
astrophysicists: correct to an order of magnitude in the exponent
How about terrorists - how many of them nailed?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Why don't they provide an envelope to check in these "little things"? For example, lets say you're carrying a keychain knife. Yeah, check it in.... into what? They'd laugh at you for trying to "check it in" (just the keychain knife), and it's yours and something you don't really feel like losing.
The whole confiscate part should be illegal! (yes, they should put it into an envelope and return it back to you after the flight (or mail it to an address of your choosing, at your expense for USPS postage). Just taking it is stealing!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Exactly. What folks think is that it's like space... insta maga hole. In reality, Everest climbers are almost at the same pressure as you have outside the airliner airplane. Yes, it's not comfortable, and without acclimating, you'll pass out (and die), but it's not "your eyes will boil out" type of pressure.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What a strange world you must live in where jumbo jets land on Apple WiFi products in an emergency!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
True.
But pressurizing and then shooting holes in the walls and windows is simple enough to test, pressure drop/time shows everything you need to know.
Then they would blow it up for boredom's sake as teaching science to idiots is dull and repetitive.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Not only does it let you lock the gun, but there is no way in hell any airport or airline is going to let themselves be "the one who lost a passenger's gun", because that means some criminal somewhere just got their hands on a firearm that they were responsible for transporting safely. If you want your luggage to arrive safely, a starter pistol or flare gun or similar are probably among the best insurance options you can buy.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
and pilots that don't like being punctured either.
What's the difference. the last thing we need is either one of these idiots acting like an idiot on a plane, or feeling like Rambo when another person decides to act like an idiot.
It wouldn't be so bad if they would just let people mail or ship the banned items back home, but the TSA insists on keeping them.
I guess all those weapons will either wind up at some TSA agent's home or be shipped to drug lords south of the border.
I think you have that backwards. If you have fewer than 6 holes, it didn't originate in California. If you have fewer than 10, it didn't originate in NYC. If you have fewer than a hundred or if the hubcaps are still intact, it didn't originate in East St. Louis.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Who says they aren't. Two can play this game!
Actually this is what he wrote initially:
The multi-layered laminated windows on aircraft don't "shoot out".
Not quite what you wrote either in words or meaning.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Yes. Unless there is some manifest criminal/terrorist intent.
To be far, the FAA wouldn't let them fly a plane to altitude and then shoot out a window. (or as they ramped up, blow holes in it with gun powder.) Not that Discovery would've approved the 50mil$ for the plane :-)
Hey, ~2.4 inches is a lot if you know how to use it. I've never had any complaints and if you are willing to put your arse on the line, then you can call me for a good time.
More on topic: My EDC is 2.4 inches and seems to make people so nervous that I resort to opening boxes with my keys. I don't know if it is TV/movies or no tolerance policies, but most higher income people (both coasts of the US) seem to be conditioned to think that knife=weapon anytime it isn't at a dining table. Adding together the demographics of people flying on planes and how stupid/unbalanced some people are, I understand why it isn't allowed and I think that airlines wouldn't allow it these days even if the TSA was removed.
I forgot:
I don't open boxes like a crazy person and don't flash my knife around.
Link to the knife - http://www.amazon.com/Spyderco...
It's a fact: every act of "trying to blow up a plane" since 9/11, including the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, and angry drunks, has been foiled by the PASSENGERS on the plane. Not the airplane crew, although I'm sure they're quite capable, and definitely not the stupid jerk who confiscated your toenail clippers. These security checkpoints are worse than useless, a needless expense.
Oh yes, because those of us who carry guns just cannot refuse pulling them and shooting holes in the walls that surround us just because it seems so much fun.
Not exactly true... They may ask you to open it so they can search it and you will have to do so if asked but they do not always do so.
It is not murky at all when the airlines are not given the choice because of federal regulations and most commercial airports are government-owned and are, therefore, not private property.
I'm not sure which world you are living in that thinks otherwise.
The suicide attacks were a new thing, which was part of why it was so shocking.
Too right. In fact, the last of the attacks failed, because it wasn't new. Some of the passengers of the third flight heard of the first two and foiled the third, at the cost of their own lives. There have been several incidents since 9/11 that indicate innocent passengers will readily provide all of the security that an airline flight needs.
if 13 lbs of falling laptop won't kill, how will 1.5 lbs of handgun? And why would a concealed handgun be in an overhead bin instead of in somebodies pocket or waistband? Have you not figured out that concealed means not seen and pulling it out to set in on the shelf above your head for everyone to see is not exactly concealing it?
Then everyone of them should have been arrested and the gun entered into an evidence locker and charges filed and when it was discovered that no criminal intent was meant and charges dropped, then the confiscated gun should be returned.
After all, if the TSA agent I not qualified to assess that risk, then the passenger should be arrested so it can all be sorted out later.
intellectually, I agree that business owners should have the right to make the decision about whether to allow concealed carry on their premises and whether to allow smoking as well. However, as long as liberals demand that private business owners not be allowed to exercise their 1st amendment right of association by refusing to serve or hire someone based on whatever prejudice the business owner may hold, I'll fight for the business owner to be denied the right to refuse service to me based on whatever I choose to carry in my pocket.
It was covered in the part about "anything else we didn't specifically mention is reserved to the people or states" (to paraphrase) part that you must have skipped. IOW, the Constitution was written to explicitly state what the federal government was allowed to do and what powers it was able to take away. The Bill of Rights were only examples of a few specific things that some thought were such awful abuses that they needed specific mention.
I remember that one and I think they forgot to take into account the fact that the plane is moving at 600mph+ through the air which I think would make Bernouilli's principle relevant. Also the hole in the fuselage may subject the fuselage to unexpected drag forces.
Terrorists have smuggled (small) bombs onto post-9/11 aircraft. The TSA hasn't caught a single would-be bomber.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
On the other hand there have been various flights hijacked internationally that haven't had that response.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
On the contrary, I think that the cannon should have been allowed onboard despite the hijack risk.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
I always thought cold fjord was some uberpatriot who believes in the American government being awesome and such, now it just seems he's slipped up quite a bit and made himself out to be a poorly-executed troll trying to raise people's hackles.
C-
Don't be silly. In most Slashdot stories actually making those complaints is practically a sure way to a +5.
"Teh Constitutions is violated!!!! Eleventy!" +5 Insightful
"TSA touches my bolllz!!" +5 Interesting
Oddly enough, it's only when the guns are solely in the hands of the mass murderers that kill counts ever breach the 5 count. Anytime other guns are present the kill count is almost always kept under 4
Why don't you kill yourself ?
you literally just argued for racism. Congrats.
there's something fundamentally different about refusing service for something that can be changed compared to something that cannot. Also, you are not being refused service, you are being offered service with terms and conditions.
... ... ... ... still waiting for a point?
Eh still don't want bullets flying while being a thousand of feet in the air
Except that the restrictions on carrying stuff aboard planes are made and enforced by the Federal government. The owners of the private property have no say in this.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Or, you are a complete fuckwit.
What a fucking idiot yeah you forgot to mention closest airport that can take an airplane of that size... or one that is open... or one that hasn't been overrun by squirrels... or invaded by aliens.... pedantic piece of shit.
True, but the owners can place additional restrictions if they like. If the feds allow chainsaws the airlines can still forbid them.
Source: Am airline pilot.
That is not authoritative on the subject. If you were an aircraft engineer designing cabin fuselage for Boeing, that would be different.
While in pilot training I'm sure you learned a lot of things about air pressure and air flow over the wings, I seriously doubt you are an expert on the exact changes involved for bullet holes in the fuselage. Flight school won't have you spending time memorizing the material properties of the compounds used in the fuselage, won't have you studying the formulas for airflow through tiny holes and the stresses it places on them. Flight school certainly won't have you analyzing assorted styles of bullet-hole punctures to see how it affects metal fatigue and stress.
And as for maintaining pressurization, as a pilot you should already know that ECS compressors are running all the time. Some of the air exits through an outflow valve, but quite a lot is constantly escaping through small leaks all over the fuselage. While the design attempts to build an air-tight fuselage, in practice there are many small holes and air escaping everywhere. Yet the aircraft doesn't explosively decompress from those small holes. "Miraculously" everything from a small Cesna to a jumbo jet remain intact despite the pressure differences and small leaks around the craft.
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
Err, you know you are not only allowed to lock luggage containing a gun, but you are required to do so? It's spelled out explicitly in the rules. [tsa.gov]*
Well, I know NOW, but I did not know before. Most people don't go to TSA.gov and read all of the rules, they just go by what they see at the airport, where it says don't lock your luggage or they will blow it up.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Every capable passenger should have an airline-approved gun with airline-approved ammo, and be forced to fire anything they brought with them into a test cabinet at the airport to make sure it is the right stuff. It should be small caliber, FMJ, subsonic. It should be carried openly where it can be accessible.
This will cause would-be terrorists to stick to external methods, like missiles.
Think of the money and hassle we would save over the TSA.
True.
But pressurizing and then shooting holes in the walls and windows is simple enough to test, pressure drop/time shows everything you need to know.
Then they would blow it up for boredom's sake as teaching science to idiots is dull and repetitive.
I didn't watch the episode (or think explosion from depressurization is the primary concern of bullets on airplanes), but... just tell me Myth Busters actually took a plane to altitude and did this? Because I don't think testing at ground level, not moving, in much hotter air, is valid. And from the comments here, that is the impression I am getting of their test.
Personally, I'm much more worried that stray bullets will take out electrical systems, hydraulics/control surfaces, lead to fires, or somehow damage bleed air systems. And any of these can set the conditions for a crew to react inappropriately.
SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling